DeRouseau v. Westchester County Family Court

Background

Kyle G. DeRouseau, proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee, sued Judge Nilda Morales-Horowitz and Judge Arlene Gordon Oliver. He invoked 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute, and the Second Amendment. His claims arose from Westchester County Family Court proceedings involving him and the mother of his child. He alleged that the judges allowed the mother to commit perjury to obtain orders of protection and facilitated the alienation of the child and parent. In the amended complaint, he added that the orders of protection deprived him of hunting and legally possessing firearms.

The court had dismissed the original complaint on October 28, 2024, while allowing 30 days to file an amended complaint. It had dismissed claims against the New York State Family Court, Westchester County, based on Eleventh Amendment immunity; dismissed claims against the two judges based on absolute judicial immunity; and found insufficient facts supporting a Second Amendment claim. DeRouseau filed an amended complaint on November 27, 2024, naming the two judges but not the Family Court.

Court’s reasoning

The court concluded that the amended complaint did not cure the defects identified in the earlier order. The judges were immune from suit for money damages for their judicial actions. The court also noted that DeRouseau did not allege that a declaratory decree had been violated, that an appeal in the state courts was unavailable, or that he sought to prevent a future violation of his rights.

The court separately held that the Second Amendment claim did not satisfy Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 8 requires enough factual matter to make a claim plausible, rather than merely possible. The allegation that the protective order deprived DeRouseau of hunting and legally possessing firearms was treated as a conclusory statement without sufficient factual detail.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii), provisions requiring dismissal of certain claims filed without paying the filing fee, including claims that fail to state a claim or seek relief from an immune defendant. Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied further leave to amend because she concluded that another amendment could not cure the defects. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. The clerk was directed to enter judgment.