Scales v. New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-07846
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Scales v. Commission, Chief Judge Swain dismissed William Scales’s lawsuit filed without fees as barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
William Scales’s federal complaint was dismissed, and he was denied fee-free status for an appeal. The Commission was protected from this federal suit by the Eleventh Amendment. The court’s earlier warning about possible restrictions on future fee-free filings remained in effect, but the opinion did not state that such a restriction was imposed in this order.
What happened
Scales v. New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct concerned William Scales’s claims that the Commission neglected its duties, causing financial harm and wasted time while he sought a remedy for alleged judicial misconduct. He represented himself and asked the Commission to compel action and possibly pay damages.
The court treated the complaint as raising claims under a federal civil-rights law. It ruled that the Eleventh Amendment generally prevents federal lawsuits against states and state entities, and that New York had not waived that protection and Congress had not removed it for these claims. The court also said amending the complaint would be futile and declined to allow an amendment.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. The court kept an earlier warning about possible restrictions on future fee-free filings, denied fee-free status for an appeal, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Scales v. New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct · No. 1:23-cv-07846
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 15, 2024
Background
William Scales, appearing without a lawyer, filed the action without prepaying filing fees. He alleged that the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct had engaged in “deliberate neglect of duty,” causing financial damages and wasted time while he sought a remedy for alleged judicial misconduct. He requested that the Commission be compelled to act and, if it was not immune, that it pay possible financial damages.
Legal basis for dismissal
Because Scales invoked federal-question jurisdiction and alleged that a state entity violated his rights, the court construed the complaint as asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute. The court held that the Eleventh Amendment barred those claims against the Commission. The court explained that states and state instrumentalities generally cannot be sued in federal court unless the state consents or Congress removes the immunity. It found that New York had not waived its immunity and that Congress had not removed it for these § 1983 claims.
Amendment and filing warning
The court denied leave to amend because the Eleventh Amendment bar could not be cured by changing the complaint. It also stated that an earlier warning remained in effect: further duplicative or non-meritorious litigation could lead to an order requiring Scales to show why he should not be barred from filing future actions in this court without first obtaining permission.
Disposition
The court dismissed Scales’s complaint as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.