Williams v. City of New York
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:22-cv-10537
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Williams v. City of New York, Judge Aaron deferred ruling on Williams’s ex parte emergency-order motion until defendants appeared.
Alexander Williams, Jr. and the defendants in his case; the motion for emergency relief remained pending until the defendants appeared.
What happened
Alexander Williams, Jr. sued the City of New York and other defendants. He is a pretrial detainee at the George R. Vierno Center and seeks money damages, declarations, and court orders for alleged constitutional violations at that facility and West Facility between August 29, 2022, and January 31, 2023.
Williams filed a motion asking for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, and later asked the court to decide the request without waiting for the defendants to respond. The court considered whether the motion met the special requirements for an emergency order issued without notice to the opposing parties.
Judge Aaron ruled that the motion did not meet the standards for an emergency order without notice, but he did not deny the motion. Instead, he deferred a decision until the defendants appeared. The court said it would then promptly schedule a conference to set a briefing schedule and address outstanding service issues.
The detailed version
- Williams v. City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-10537
- Stewart Aaron
- Mar. 17, 2023
Background
The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron for general pretrial management and to decide Alexander Williams, Jr.’s motion titled “Combined Motion for TRO & Preliminary Injunction.” Before the referral, District Judge Rearden had entered an order concerning service of the case.
Williams filed a pleading that he titled an “Amended Complaint,” which the court treated as his Second Amended Complaint. The opinion states that Williams is a pretrial detainee at the George R. Vierno Center. He seeks money damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief based on alleged constitutional violations at the George R. Vierno Center and West Facility between August 29, 2022, and January 31, 2023.
Motion for an Emergency Order
Williams’s January 31, 2023 motion sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. He later asked the court to decide the request without the defendants first appearing or responding. Several defendants had executed waivers of service, while service on other defendants remained an open issue.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 allows a temporary restraining order to be issued without written or oral notice to the opposing party only when specific facts in an affidavit or verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury will occur before the opposing party can be heard. The court also noted that parties proceeding without lawyers must still follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Ruling
Judge Aaron found that Williams’s motion did not meet the standards for an emergency temporary restraining order issued without notice. The court therefore deferred ruling on the motion until the defendants had appeared. The court stated that, after their appearance, it would promptly schedule a status conference to establish a briefing schedule for the pending motion and address remaining questions about the service order and service on the other defendants.
The order deferred a ruling on the motion; it did not state that the motion was denied.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.