Geller v. De Blasio

Background

The case was brought by Pamela Geller against Bill De Blasio and Dermot Shea, individually and in their official capacities. The opinion states that Geller challenged executive orders and policies concerning nonessential gatherings during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the Mayor’s March 25, 2020 executive order.

Towaki Komatsu filed a motion without a lawyer on May 14, 2020, asking to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(b)(1)(B). That rule allows a court, in its discretion, to let someone join a case when that person has a claim or defense sharing a common legal or factual question with the main action. Komatsu alternatively asked to appear as a friend of the court.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that a person seeking permissive intervention must timely apply, show an interest in the action, show that the interest could be harmed by the action’s outcome, and show that the existing parties do not adequately protect that interest. Failure to satisfy any one of these requirements is enough to deny the application.

Komatsu’s dispute with the defendants involved allegations that staff of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio prevented him from protesting the Mayor at meetings and public hearings years before the COVID-19 pandemic. The court found that these allegations did not arise from the March 25, 2020 executive order or its restriction on nonessential gatherings. The court also found that Komatsu had not shown that the issues in Geller’s complaint would not be adequately protected by Geller; his motion did not address that requirement.

Disposition

Judge Denise Cote denied Komatsu’s motion to intervene. The court also denied his alternative request to appear as a friend of the court.