Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 15, 2024

Kaul v. Intercontinental Exchange

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:21-cv-06992
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Kaul v. Intercontinental Exchange, Judge Oetken denied Kaul permission to pursue part of a North Carolina lawsuit, enforcing a prior filing injunction.

Who this affects

Richard Arjun Kaul and the defendants named in this case, including Christopher Christie and Dr. Robert Heary, insofar as Kaul sought to pursue the North Carolina lawsuit against them.

What happened

In Kaul v. Intercontinental Exchange, the court addressed Richard Arjun Kaul’s filing of a lawsuit in North Carolina involving the revocation of his medical license. A prior order barred him from filing related actions against defendants in this case without permission.

Kaul had not obtained permission before filing the North Carolina lawsuit, which named Christopher Christie, Dr. Robert Heary, and others who were also defendants in this case. The court therefore denied him permission to file or pursue that lawsuit as to those defendants.

The court ordered Kaul to withdraw the North Carolina lawsuit as to those defendants within 14 days and warned that he could face monetary sanctions and contempt if he did not. Judge J. Paul Oetken issued the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Kaul v. Intercontinental Exchange · No. 1:21-cv-06992
Judge
James Oetken
Date
Mar. 15, 2024

Background

On September 12, 2022, the court imposed a nationwide filing injunction against Plaintiff Richard Arjun Kaul. The injunction barred Kaul from filing in any United States district court an action, motion, petition, complaint, or request for relief against defendants named in this litigation when it related to or arose from the denial of his medical license, unless he first obtained permission from this court. The earlier order stated that filings made without permission would be denied and that Kaul could face sanctions. Kaul did not appeal that order.

The North Carolina Lawsuit

The court learned that Kaul had filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina concerning alleged wrongdoing connected to the revocation of his medical license. That lawsuit named Christopher Christie and Dr. Robert Heary, who were also defendants in this case, as well as other defendants. Kaul did not obtain permission from this court before filing it.

Ruling

The court determined that Kaul violated the filing injunction. It denied Kaul permission to file or pursue the North Carolina lawsuit as to Christie, Heary, and any other defendants who were named in this case. It also ordered Kaul to withdraw the North Carolina lawsuit as to those defendants within 14 days of the order. The court warned that failure to do so could result in monetary sanctions and contempt. This order addressed enforcement of the filing injunction and did not decide the underlying allegations in the North Carolina lawsuit.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.