Babyrev v. Sullivan
- Louis Stanton
- 1:20-cv-03432
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Babyrev v. Sullivan, Judge Stanton denied a petition seeking Tyson’s release, allowing Tyson to refile personally or through a qualified representative.
Wilbur Tyson’s request for release was denied because Vadim Babyrev and Sergey Babyrev did not establish that either qualified to bring the petition for him. Tyson may bring a new petition personally or through a qualified next friend.
What happened
Babyrev v. Sullivan involved a petition seeking Wilbur Tyson’s release from the Kirby Forensic Psychiatric Center because of his vulnerability to COVID-19. The petition was submitted on behalf of Tyson by Vadim Babyrev, with Sergey Babyrev signing and filing documents for Vadim.
The court considered whether Vadim or Sergey could act as a qualified representative for Tyson in the case. The court said neither had shown both a significant relationship with Tyson and genuine dedication to Tyson’s best interests.
Judge Louis L. Stanton denied the petition without prejudice, meaning Tyson may bring a new petition himself or through someone who qualifies as his representative. The court also denied the filing-fee waiver request as moot.
The detailed version
- Babyrev v. Sullivan · No. 1:20-cv-03432
- Louis Stanton
- June 3, 2020
Background
Vadim Babyrev filed a pro se petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 seeking the release of Wilbur Tyson from the Kirby Forensic Psychiatric Center. The petition said Tyson was vulnerable to COVID-19 infection. It also said that Vadim and Tyson were both held at Kirby and that Vadim was bringing the petition for Tyson at Tyson’s request because Tyson could not bring it himself.
The petition was signed by Sergey Babyrev, who said he typed and signed it for Vadim because restrictions on Vadim’s use of writing utensils prevented Vadim from doing so. Sergey described himself as Vadim’s next of kin and later stated in an application to waive the filing fee that he was Vadim’s brother. The court received that application signed and filed by Sergey on Vadim’s behalf.
Legal standard
A “next friend” is a person who brings a habeas corpus petition for someone in custody. Habeas corpus is a legal procedure used to challenge a person’s custody or seek release. The detained person remains the real party in interest. To act as a next friend, the person must adequately explain why the detained person cannot appear personally, show genuine dedication to that person’s best interests, and have a significant relationship with that person.
Court’s analysis
The court said it appeared that Vadim, Sergey, or both were bringing the petition for Tyson as next friends. The court did not need to decide why Tyson could not bring the petition himself because neither Vadim nor Sergey had shown the required dedication to Tyson’s best interests and significant relationship with Tyson.
The information provided about Vadim showed only that he, like Tyson, was held at Kirby and that restrictions on his use of writing utensils prevented him from preparing the petition himself. The information about Sergey showed that he was Vadim’s brother, was not in custody, and had prepared, signed, and filed the documents for Vadim. The court concluded that these facts did not establish that either person qualified to act for Tyson.
Disposition
The court denied the petition without prejudice to Tyson’s bringing a petition himself or through a person who qualifies as a next friend. The court also denied the filing-fee waiver application as moot. The order did not decide whether Tyson should be released because of the COVID-19 risk or otherwise reach the merits of his custody.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.