Mallgren v. New York City

Background

Anthony Brian Mallgren appeared without a lawyer and was described as being involuntarily hospitalized at Bellevue Hospital. A prior related proceeding had barred him from filing future civil actions in the Southern District of New York without paying filing fees unless he first obtained the court’s permission. That restriction had been imposed because of his history of litigation that the court characterized as frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise lacking merit.

Mallgren’s Action

Mallgren asked for permission to file this action and to proceed without paying the applicable fees. He named New York City, New York State, the American Psychiatric Association, and Dr. Can Kilciksiz, who appeared to be his treating physician, as respondents. Mallgren alleged that he had been admitted to Bellevue on or about November 25, 2024. He also alleged that he had unsuccessfully tried to work with providers to disprove diagnoses that they had applied and that Dr. Kilciksiz had knowingly, willfully, and maliciously attempted to apply at least one diagnosis improperly. He sought damages.

Court’s Analysis and Ruling

The court concluded that the action continued Mallgren’s pattern of frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise nonmeritorious litigation because the complaint did not assert facts suggesting a plausible claim for relief. Judge Laura Taylor Swain therefore denied Mallgren leave to file the action and denied him permission to proceed without paying filing fees. The court dismissed the action without prejudice, meaning the dismissal itself did not bar refiling, although Mallgren remained subject to the existing filing restriction.

The court warned that additional frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise nonmeritorious filings could result in further sanctions, including additional filing restrictions and monetary penalties. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment dismissing the action.