Coleman Bey v. Administration for Children's Services
- Kimba Wood
- 1:24-cv-08096
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
Coleman Bey v. Administration for Children’s Services: Judge Wood dismissed the complaint as frivolous and insufficiently pleaded.
The dismissal affected Bashiri Coleman Bey’s action against the Administration for Children’s Services and the identified employee; the court directed entry of judgment and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
In Bashiri Coleman Bey v. Administration for Children’s Services, the plaintiff filed a complaint without a lawyer against the Administration for Children’s Services and an employee. The complaint referred to alleged criminal conduct, fraud, forgery, treason, securities violations, and violations of federal racketeering and foreign-corruption laws, and sought the return of property and children.
The court said the complaint did not clearly explain what either defendant did that violated the plaintiff’s rights. It also found that many allegations appeared nonsensical or frivolous and that the plaintiff could not use a civil lawsuit to bring criminal charges.
Judge Kimba M. Wood dismissed the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim, denied permission to amend, denied fee-free status for an appeal, and directed the Clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Coleman Bey v. Administration for Children's Services · No. 1:24-cv-08096
- Kimba Wood
- July 15, 2025
Background
Bashiri Coleman Bey, appearing without a lawyer, sued the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) and an employee whose name appears inconsistently in the opinion and filings as Jeff Hanhauser, Jeff Danhauser, or Jess Danhauser. The court had previously allowed Bey to proceed without paying the filing fee.
The complaint was a collection of documents without a case caption. It appeared to assert claims involving criminal conduct, forgery, fraud, treason, securities violations, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The filings also referred to state-court child-neglect proceedings and sought the release or return of children, the return of property, settlement payments, and orders requiring defendants to stop interfering in Bey’s affairs.
Reasons for Dismissal
The court explained that it had to dismiss a fee-free complaint that was frivolous, failed to state a claim for relief, or sought money from an immune defendant. It also had to dismiss claims over which it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Although courts read filings by people without lawyers generously, those filings still must provide a short and plain statement showing an entitlement to relief.
The court held that the complaint did not provide enough facts to show what ACS or the employee allegedly did or failed to do that violated Bey’s rights. The allegations therefore did not satisfy Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires enough factual detail to make a claim plausible. The court also stated that much of the complaint appeared nonsensical or frivolous and that a private person cannot pursue criminal charges through a civil lawsuit.
Disposition
The court dismissed the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)–(ii). It denied leave to amend because amendment would be futile. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment dismissing the action.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.