Buxbaum v. Sommer
- Vargas
- 1:24-cv-09546
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Buxbaum v. Sommer, Judge Vargas warned that further threats could lead to dismissal with prejudice and filing restrictions.
Michael Buxbaum, Defendants Adam Daniel Sommer and the other defendants, their counsel, and the court; the order also involved the United States Marshals Service.
What happened
In Buxbaum v. Sommer, Defendants’ counsel reported that Michael Buxbaum had directed abusive language and threats of violence at counsel and the parties. The submitted materials included emails, an affidavit, and a voicemail transcript describing obscene language, accusations against a federal judge, and multiple death threats.
The court warned Buxbaum that additional malicious, harassing, or threatening conduct could result in immediate dismissal of the case with prejudice and a ban on further filings in the Southern District of New York. The court also said it might notify other courts about such a filing ban.
Judge Jeannette A. Vargas did not dismiss the case or impose those sanctions in this order. She directed Defendants to notify the court immediately if the conduct continued and sent the letter and attachments to the United States Marshals Service.
The detailed version
- Buxbaum v. Sommer · No. 1:24-cv-09546
- Vargas
- Mar. 31, 2025
Background
On March 28, 2025, Defendants’ counsel notified the court by letter about conduct attributed to Plaintiff Michael Buxbaum. The letter included emails, an affidavit, and a voicemail transcript. According to the materials described in the order, Buxbaum used abusive and obscene language, accused a sitting federal judge of criminal conduct, and made multiple death threats directed at counsel and the parties.
Court’s Warning
The court called the reported conduct “inexcusable and unacceptable” and stated that it would not tolerate abusive language or threats of violence toward counsel or the parties. The court warned that any additional malicious, harassing, or threatening conduct could result in the immediate dismissal of the case with prejudice. The court cited its inherent powers and the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), as potential authority for that action.
The court also warned that possible sanctions could include barring Buxbaum from making further filings in the Southern District of New York and notifying other courts about the filing bar. The court directed Defendants to notify it immediately if Buxbaum continued this type of conduct.
Action Taken and Disposition
The order does not dismiss the case, impose a filing bar, or impose another sanction. It issues a warning about possible future sanctions and states that a copy of Defendants’ letter and attachments was sent to the United States Marshals Service. Judge Jeannette A. Vargas signed the order on March 31, 2025.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.