Pickering-George v. Gazivoda Managment LLC
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-08006
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Pickering-George v. Gazivoda Management LLC, Chief Judge Swain denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees and dismissed the action without prejudice.
John T. Pickering-George’s new action was dismissed without prejudice, and he was denied permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The named defendants were not required to litigate the allegations in this action.
What happened
In Pickering-George v. Gazivoda Management LLC, John T. Pickering-George filed a new complaint without a lawyer against several property-management entities, government offices, and officials. He alleged that hazardous conditions in his Bronx apartment caused serious illness and that his landlord engaged in lockouts, utility shutoffs, and taking his belongings.
Because an earlier order barred him from filing new actions without paying filing fees unless the court first gave permission, Pickering-George asked for that permission. He argued only that the defendants would not be harmed. The court reviewed the complaint and found no allegations suggesting that he could bring a valid claim within the court’s authority.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied permission for Pickering-George to proceed without prepaying filing fees and dismissed the action without prejudice. The court also said that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees on appeal.
The detailed version
- Pickering-George v. Gazivoda Managment LLC · No. 1:22-cv-08006
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 24, 2022
Background
John T. Pickering-George filed a new complaint without a lawyer against Gazivoda Management LLC, Calvin Seecharm, A. Gazivoda Management Property, Dream Realty Corporation Management, the Office of the Bronx District Attorney, the “Bronx Tort Unit,” the Bronx County Sheriff’s Office, the Office of the New York State Attorney General, New York Supreme Court Justice Eileen A. Rakower, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, the “Bronx Pro Group,” “New Management Jeniffer,” and “Belongings Property.”
The complaint invoked federal-question jurisdiction and referred to federal criminal statutes and supplemental jurisdiction, which allows a federal court to hear certain related state-law claims. Pickering-George alleged that, from 2009 through 2011, he became seriously ill because of an undesirable hazardous condition in his Bronx apartment. He also alleged that his landlord engaged in lockouts, utility shutoffs, and taking tenant belongings. The complaint referred to a state-court proceeding from 2012 and stated that Pickering-George was homeless from 2011 through 2022.
Prior filing restriction and motion
The court stated that an order entered in 2008 in a prior related proceeding barred Pickering-George from filing any new action without paying filing fees unless he first obtained the court’s permission. He filed this complaint together with a motion asking for permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. His only stated reason for seeking permission was that the defendants would not be prejudiced.
Court’s ruling
The court concluded that the new complaint was not a departure from Pickering-George’s pattern of frivolous litigation. It found no allegations suggesting that he could state a viable claim within the court’s jurisdiction against the named defendants. The court therefore denied his request for permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees and dismissed the action without prejudice.
The court directed the clerk to terminate the motion and enter judgment. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees for an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.