Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 21, 2025

Abdullah v. Delgado

Judge
Garnett
Docket
1:24-cv-00137
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePreliminary Injunction
In one sentence

In Abdullah v. Delgado, Judge Garnett denied Abdullah Abdul Haqq’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.

Who this affects

Abdullah Abdul Haqq’s request for emergency court relief was denied; the order also directed him to raise discovery concerns with Magistrate Judge Ricardo.

What happened

Abdullah Abdul Haqq asked the court for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction after an alleged incident involving New York City police officers.

The court said the request did not explain the facts or legal reasons supporting emergency relief. Instead, it contained unfinished bracketed placeholders, and accompanying interrogatories provided no additional information for evaluating the request.

Judge Garnett denied the motion and directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion and serve the order on Abdullah Abdul Haqq. The court also said discovery concerns should be raised with Magistrate Judge Ricardo.

The detailed version

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

Case
Abdullah v. Delgado · No. 1:24-cv-00137
Judge
Garnett
Date
Mar. 21, 2025

Background

Abdullah Abdul Haqq filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction on March 19, 2025. The defendants named in the case are Sergeant Smith, Lieutenant Edwardo Chandradeo, P.O. Randy Delgado, and P.O. M. Ducasse.

Legal standard

The court explained that temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions use the same standard under Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A person seeking this relief must show a likely win on the merits, likely irreparable harm without the relief, that the balance of equities favors an injunction, and that an injunction serves the public interest.

Court’s reasoning

The court found that the motion provided no factual or legal basis for the requested relief. It contained unfinished bracketed placeholders, including a prompt asking for the date and details of an incident involving members of the New York City Police Department. The accompanying First Set of Interrogatories did not provide additional information that would allow the court to evaluate the required factors.

Ruling

The court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion docket entry and serve the order on Abdullah Abdul Haqq. The court also stated that concerns about the discovery schedule, discovery plan, or defendants’ compliance with discovery requests should be raised with Magistrate Judge Ricardo. This order addressed the emergency-relief motion; the opinion does not decide the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.