Knight v. City of New York
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-10755
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Knight v. City of New York, Judge Caproni granted defendants’ motion to dismiss claims challenging a two-handgun limit; some were dismissed, others with prejudice.
Cavalier D. Knight’s claims were dismissed. The City of New York and Edward Caban obtained dismissal of the claims challenged in their motion.
What happened
In Knight v. City of New York, Cavalier D. Knight sued New York City and Edward Caban over a police rule limiting carry-handgun licenses to two handguns. Knight, who represented himself, claimed the rule violated the Fifth, Fourteenth, and Second Amendments and New York law.
The defendants asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of standing and failure to state a claim. A magistrate judge recommended granting that request, and Judge Caproni found no clear error after reviewing Knight’s objections. The objections were largely unrelated to the recommendation, conclusive, or repetitive.
Judge Valerie Caproni adopted the recommendation in full and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court dismissed Knight’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment claims, without stating a prejudice term, and dismissed his Second Amendment, Section 4, and preemption claims with prejudice. The court also closed the case.
The detailed version
- Knight v. City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-10755
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 12, 2024
Background
Cavalier D. Knight, proceeding without a lawyer, sued the City of New York and Edward Caban. He challenged New York City Police Department Rule 38 RCNY § 25(d)(4)(i), which limits to two the number of handguns that may appear on a carry-handgun license.
Knight alleged that the rule violated the Fifth, Fourteenth, and Second Amendments and New York Civil Rights Law § 4. He also argued that the rule was preempted, meaning displaced by, New York Penal Law § 400.00. The opinion also notes that Knight raised an argument under the Privileges and Immunities Clause in his opposition to the dismissal motion, but that argument was not included in his complaint.
Procedural history and analysis
The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of standing and failure to state a claim. Magistrate Judge Figueredo recommended granting the motion in full. The recommendation concluded that Knight lacked standing for his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment claims because they depended on the possibility that police might confiscate his handguns at some future time. It further concluded that the Second Amendment and Section 4 claims failed because the rule did not infringe conduct protected at the core of those laws. The recommendation rejected the preemption claim because New York Penal Law § 400.00 clearly states that it was not intended to prevent local laws from being enacted or applied.
Knight objected to the recommendation. Judge Caproni found that the objections were largely unrelated to the recommendation, conclusory, or repetitive of arguments Knight had already made. Because the objections were not substantive, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Disposition
Judge Valerie Caproni adopted the report and recommendation in full and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court dismissed Knight’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment claims. The order does not attach a prejudice term to those dismissals. The court dismissed Knight’s Second Amendment, New York Civil Rights Law § 4, and preemption claims with prejudice. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion and close the case.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.