Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 8, 2025

Beaman v. Human Resources Administration

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-10071
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePreliminary InjunctionPro Se
In one sentence

In Beaman v. Human Resources Administration, Judge Swain denied emergency relief and ordered a complaint and service address or electronic-service consent within 30 days.

Who this affects

Shelton Beaman must file a complaint and provide a mailing address or consent to electronic service within 30 days; the Human Resources Administration, Abdul Bambaa, and Teresa Duarte are named defendants.

What happened

In Beaman v. Human Resources Administration, Shelton Beaman asked the court to stop the Human Resources Administration and the other defendants from discontinuing or denying his public assistance benefits. He had submitted a proposed order for emergency relief but had not filed a complaint.

The court denied the request because Beaman’s two-page filing contained no factual allegations suggesting that the defendants had violated his rights or showing that he was likely to succeed. The court also directed him to file a complaint within 30 days and provide a mailing address or consent to electronic service.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated that the case would be dismissed if Beaman did not meet those requirements within the allowed time. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Beaman v. Human Resources Administration · No. 1:24-cv-10071
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 8, 2025

Background

Shelton Beaman, proceeding without a lawyer, submitted a proposed order to show cause seeking a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. The Clerk of Court opened the submission as a new civil action. Beaman had not filed a complaint. The opinion states that the court had previously granted his application to proceed without paying the filing fee.

Beaman asked the court to prevent the Human Resources Administration, Abdul Bambaa, and Teresa Duarte from discontinuing or denying his public assistance benefits.

Preliminary Injunctive Relief

A preliminary injunction is a court order issued before final judgment. The court explained that Beaman had to show likely irreparable harm and either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious legal questions combined with a balance of hardships strongly favoring him.

The court found that Beaman’s two-page motion contained no factual allegations at all. It therefore did not show either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions supporting emergency relief. The court denied Beaman’s request for an order to show cause and denied the requested preliminary injunctive relief.

Required Complaint and Service Information

The court explained that a civil action begins when a complaint is filed. Because Beaman had filed only a proposed order to show cause, the court directed him to file a complaint within 30 days of the order.

The court also directed Beaman, within the same 30-day period, to provide a mailing address where he could receive documents or submit consent to electronic service. No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that the action would be dismissed if Beaman did not comply within the time allowed.

Disposition

The court denied Beaman’s request for an order to show cause, directed him to file a complaint, and directed him to provide a mailing address or consent to electronic service. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.

Judge

The order was signed by Laura Taylor Swain, Chief United States District Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.