Sullivan v. New York City Police Department
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-05361
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Sullivan v. New York City Police Department, Judge Swain denied Sullivan’s request for an order to show cause seeking preliminary relief.
Mustafa Sullivan’s request for preliminary injunctive relief was denied; the order also affected his ability to pursue an appeal without paying fees.
What happened
In Sullivan v. New York City Police Department, Mustafa Sullivan, representing himself, asked the court for preliminary injunctive relief through an order to show cause.
The court said this relief requires a showing of likely irreparable harm and either a likely win on the merits or serious questions supporting the case and a strongly favorable balance of hardships. The court found that Sullivan’s submissions did not meet the required merits showing and denied the request.
Judge Swain also directed the clerk to mail Sullivan the order and stated that any appeal would not be considered to have been brought in good faith, so Sullivan could not proceed without paying appeal fees.
The detailed version
- Sullivan v. New York City Police Department · No. 1:25-cv-05361
- Laura Swain
- July 2, 2025
Background
Mustafa Sullivan filed a complaint and, while representing himself, requested an order to show cause seeking preliminary injunctive relief against the New York City Police Department, Hudson River Park Trust, Noreen Doyle, Christine Fazio, and Robert Atterbery.
Legal standard
The court explained that a preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy. To obtain it, a party must show likely irreparable harm and either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions for litigation combined with a balance of hardships that strongly favors the party seeking relief.
Ruling
The court found that Sullivan’s submissions did not demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions accompanied by a strongly favorable balance of hardships. It therefore denied Sullivan’s request for an order to show cause, identified as ECF No. 1. The court said it would issue an explanatory order later.
The clerk was directed to mail Sullivan a copy of the order and record service on the docket. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.