Unified United States Common Law Grand Jury v. NYS Legislators
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:24-cv-07084
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Unified United States Common Law Grand Jury v. NYS Legislators — Judge Karas dismissed Grand Jury’s claims without prejudice and ordered Foreman to identify themself or justify pseudonym use.
The Unified United States Common Law Grand Jury’s claims were dismissed without prejudice because it did not obtain an attorney. Grand Jury Foreman was required to identify themself or justify proceeding under a pseudonym by January 3, 2025, or could be dismissed.
What happened
In Unified United States Common Law Grand Jury v. NYS Legislators, the plaintiffs asked the Clerk of Court to issue summonses to the defendants. The court then ordered the Grand Jury to obtain a lawyer and ordered Grand Jury Foreman to either request permission to use a pseudonym or add their name to the complaint.
The deadline for making those changes was November 8, 2024, but no plaintiff took action. Because the Grand Jury did not obtain a lawyer, it could not continue litigating its claims.
The court dismissed the Grand Jury’s claims without prejudice. Judge Kenneth M. Karas also ordered the plaintiffs to amend the complaint by January 3, 2025, either naming the Foreman or explaining why the Foreman should be allowed to proceed under a pseudonym; otherwise, the Foreman could be dismissed.
The detailed version
- Unified United States Common Law Grand Jury v. NYS Legislators · No. 7:24-cv-07084
- Kenneth Karas
- Dec. 4, 2024
Background
On September 18, 2024, the plaintiffs requested that the Clerk of Court issue summonses to the defendants. On October 10, 2024, the court issued an order requiring the plaintiff identified as the Unified United States Common Law Grand Jury (the “Grand Jury”) to obtain counsel. The order also required Grand Jury Foreman (the “Foreman”) to file a motion asking to proceed under a pseudonym—a name that hides the person’s identity—or to amend the complaint to include the Foreman’s name.
The court warned that failing to make these corrections would prevent summonses from issuing and could result in dismissal of the Grand Jury from the action. The deadline was November 8, 2024. The opinion states that no plaintiff took action by that time.
Rulings
The court stated that the Grand Jury could not proceed because it had failed to retain an attorney to represent it. The court therefore dismissed the Grand Jury’s claims without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling those claims.
The court did not dismiss the Foreman’s claims in this order. Instead, it ordered the plaintiffs to amend the complaint by January 3, 2025, either to include the Foreman’s name or to show why the Foreman should be permitted to proceed under a pseudonym. The order states that the Foreman could otherwise be dismissed from the action. Judge Kenneth M. Karas also directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to the plaintiffs.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.