Herbert v. Ginty

Background

Jeremiah F. Herbert, who was incarcerated at the Sullivan County Jail, brought claims against six defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. He was representing himself and was proceeding without paying the filing fee.

Herbert submitted his third application for injunctive relief and a temporary restraining order in letters dated February 14, 15, and 19, 2021. His request concerned alleged constitutional violations involving visitation rights, officials’ reading of incoming mail, charges for telephone use, outdoor exercise, clothing, and the posting of institutional rules.

Herbert’s first two applications had been denied because he had not shown that he would suffer irreparable injury without emergency relief, had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits, and sought relief unrelated to his underlying claims. Defendants Calangelo, Ruggiero, and Matis opposed the third application. Defendants Ginty, Bini, and Smith, who were separately represented, did not file opposition.

Legal Standard

The court described an injunction as an extraordinary remedy. To obtain one, Herbert had to show that he was likely to succeed on the merits, likely to suffer irreparable harm without preliminary relief, that the balance of equities favored him, and that an injunction would serve the public interest.

Ruling

The court held that Herbert had not satisfied his burden and denied his third application for a temporary restraining order and injunctive relief for the same reasons given for the earlier applications. The order did not state that the denial was with or without prejudice. Judge Philip M. Halpern directed the clerk to mail Herbert a copy of the order.