DeRouseau v. Korzeilus

Background

Kyle G. DeRouseau, appearing without a lawyer, sued John T. Korzeilus and sought $1.5 million in damages. The complaint alleged that on March 5, 2024, Korzeilus harassed DeRouseau in front of witnesses and banned him from entering the firehouse. DeRouseau also alleged that he was not allowed to act as a volunteer firefighter because of two arrests, that he could not vote, and that his application fee was taken while his application was discarded in 2023. The complaint also referred to a woman allegedly being allowed to stay in the firehouse, but the relevance of that allegation was unclear.

The court had previously allowed DeRouseau to proceed without prepaying filing fees. As part of the required review of such a complaint, the court considered whether the pleading was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or raised claims outside the court’s jurisdiction.

Court’s Analysis

The court identified two possible claims: that DeRouseau’s application to become a volunteer firefighter was denied in 2023, possibly because of his arrest history, and that he was excluded from the fire station and therefore unable to vote. The court found that the complaint did not satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, which requires enough factual detail to make a claim plausible and to show why the plaintiff is entitled to relief.

Regarding the volunteer-firefighter claim, the court explained that New York law requires criminal background checks for volunteer firefighters and provides certain challenge and appeal rights when an application is denied based on specified convictions. The court said DeRouseau had not explained the nature of the charges, whether the arrests led to convictions, or whether he used any available appeal process. It also stated that DeRouseau would need to identify a basis for federal jurisdiction if the claim relied only on state law.

Regarding voting, the court said it was unclear whether DeRouseau tried to enter the firehouse, whether it was his designated polling place, when he tried to vote, or whether the alleged harassment was connected to voting. The court directed him to include facts about what happened and who was personally involved if he pursued that claim.

Ruling and Required Amendment

The court granted DeRouseau leave to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The amended complaint must replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint, so any facts or claims he wants to keep must be repeated. The court directed him to provide the relevant people’s names and titles, the events and approximate dates and locations, the injuries he suffered, and the relief requested. It also instructed him to provide an address for any named defendant if he has one.

The court stated that no summons would issue at that time. It warned that if DeRouseau failed to amend within the permitted period and could not show good cause, the complaint would be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. The order referred DeRouseau to the Southern District of New York Federal Pro Se Legal Assistance Project, which the order described as a private organization rather than part of the court.