Kellier v. Ross
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-02506
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Kellier v. Ross, Judge Swain denied Joshua Kellier’s emergency requests to intervene in his ongoing state criminal proceedings and denied fee-free appeal status.
Joshua Kellier’s emergency requests for intervention in his ongoing New York state criminal proceedings were denied; the complaint’s underlying claims remained for later review.
What happened
In Kellier v. Ross, Joshua Kellier, representing himself, sued three defendants over alleged violations of his rights during ongoing New York state criminal proceedings. He asked the federal court to intervene in those proceedings, remove Judge Neil Ross, and provide other emergency relief.
The court explained that emergency court orders require a showing of likely irreparable harm and either a likely win or serious legal questions combined with hardships favoring the requesting party. It said judicial immunity and the general rule against federal intervention in pending state criminal cases suggested Kellier was unlikely to win. The court also found that his filings did not meet the alternative standard.
Judge Swain denied both requests for emergency preliminary relief. The court said it would later address the claims in the complaint, including whether summonses should issue, and denied fee-free appeal status for this order.
The detailed version
- Kellier v. Ross · No. 1:22-cv-02506
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 21, 2022
Background
Joshua Kellier filed this self-represented action under state and federal law concerning alleged violations of his rights during ongoing New York state criminal proceedings. The defendants named in the caption were Mr. Neil Ross, Mrs. Nicole Bedford, and Mrs. Ellen Biben. The opinion’s factual description identifies Neil Ross as a New York County Criminal Court judge, Ellen Biben as an administrative judge, and a clerk named Nicole Beckford.
Kellier filed two emergency motions seeking preliminary injunctive relief. His requests included federal intervention in his ongoing state criminal proceedings and removal of Judge Ross from presiding over those proceedings. The second motion also appeared to seek similar relief and asked the Clerk of Court to issue summonses.
Legal standard and analysis
A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary court order issued before final judgment. To obtain one, Kellier had to show likely irreparable harm and either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious legal questions, along with a balance of hardships strongly favoring him.
The court stated that it was reviewing the complaint in full and would issue a later order. At this preliminary stage, however, it said the doctrine of absolute judicial immunity and the general rule that federal courts should abstain from intervening in pending state criminal proceedings suggested that Kellier was not likely to succeed. The court also found that his submissions did not present sufficiently serious legal questions or a balance of hardships strongly favoring emergency relief.
Rulings
The court denied Kellier’s requests for preliminary injunctive relief, identified as docket entries 5 and 8. It did not decide the complaint’s claims in this order. The court stated that it would later address those claims, including whether summonses should issue.
The court also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Kellier permission to proceed without paying the appeal filing costs. The opinion separately noted that, because Kellier was proceeding without paying filing fees, the court was required to screen the complaint for claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, or seek money from an immune defendant.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.