Malek v. N.Y. Unified Court Sys.
| Decision Date | 09 March 2023 |
| Docket Number | 22-cv-5416 (HG) (RER),22-cv-6515 (HG) (RER),22-cv-6538 (HG) (RER),22-cv-6775 (HG) (RER),22-cv-7815 (HG) (RER) |
| Parties | ROBERT MALEK, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM, et al., Defendants. ROBERT MALEK, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM, et al., Defendants. ROBERT MALEK, Plaintiff, v. LETITIA JAMES, et al., Defendants. ROBERT MALEK, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM, et al., Defendants. ROBERT MALEK, ROBERT MALEK C/O M.M, Plaintiffs, v. MARGARET INGOGLIA, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Table of Contents
BACKGROUND 1
PROCEDURAL HISTORY 2
CONSOLIDATION 10
LEGAL STANDARD 11
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 12
A. Section 1985.......................................................................................................... 17
B. Title VI .................................................................................................................. 19
A. NYAG, OCFS, OIG, UCS, and the Excellence Initiative .................................... 22
B. DiFiore, James, Poole, White, and Kuryluk ......................................................... 23
C. Williams, Stanley, John/Jane Doe ........................................................................ 26
D. ACS/NYC Children; ACS Attorneys and Staff .................................................... 27
E. Office of the Corporation Counsel and Attorneys ................................................ 30
F. Brooklyn and Manhattan DAs' Offices, the N.Y.P.D., and Detective Thimote ... 31
H. Synmoie and Hevesi ............................................................................................. 33
I. Legal Aid and Legal Aid Attorneys ...................................................................... 34
J. Sun River Defendants ........................................................................................... 36
K. Margaret Ingoglia and J.P.I. .................................................................................. 38
Pro se Plaintiff Robert Malek commenced the five above-captioned actions between November 2021 and December 2022.[1]Plaintiff brings civil rights claims against individuals and entities involved with either (i) a Family Court proceeding brought against Plaintiff in Kings County, New York or (ii) Plaintiff's subsequent federal lawsuits, which were brought in response to that Family Court proceeding. For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff's complaints are consolidated, and all of Plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice.
These actions stem from a neglect petition filed against Plaintiff by the New York City Administration for Children's Services (“ACS”) in Kings County Family Court, pursuant to Article 10 of the New York Family Court Act, on July 31, 2018 (the “Family Court Proceeding”). Malek I, ECF No. 1-1 (Family Court records); Malek I, ECF Nos. 151-2, 151-3 (final Family Court orders). In March 2020, after a temporary order of protection was entered against Plaintiff directing him to refrain from seeing his minor child except for ACS-supervised visits, see Malek I, ECF No. 1-1 at 15, Plaintiff filed a motion in Family Court seeking to modify the visitation order so he could attend church with his child, id. at 41-43. Plaintiff's original complaint alleged that the judge in the Family Court Proceeding ignored this motion, as well as some of his other filings. Malek v. N.Y. State Unified Ct. Sys., et al. (“Malek I '), No. 22-cv-5416, ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”) at 1. He also alleged that a Family Court clerk improperly rejected some of his filings in the Family Court Proceeding. Id.; see also Malek I, ECF No. 1-1 at 117; Malek I, ECF No. 91-4 at 14-16 (Family Court filings).
On November 16, 2021, Plaintiff attended a show-cause hearing in Family Court to address, among other things, his request to modify the Family Court's visitation order so he could attend church with his child. Malek I, ECF No. 91-4 at 28-49 (transcript of hearing). At that hearing, the judge noted that the temporary order of protection “indicated very clearly that the visits would remain suspended until there's some demonstration by [Plaintiff] that he's . . . in services or mental health assessment,” id. at 31, and denied Plaintiffs request to modify the visitation order until he complied with those conditions, id. at 36.
The Family Court Proceeding concluded on March 31, 2022, and the Family Court's final orders were issued on April 4, 2022.[2] Malek I, ECF Nos. 151-2, 151-3 (final Family Court orders). Plaintiff concedes that he has not appealed the final order, nor does he intend to. Malek IV, ECF No.1 (“Compl.”) at 47. The time to appeal has expired. See N.Y. Family Court Act § 1113 ().
On November 11, 2021, before the Family Court Proceeding had concluded, Plaintiff filed his first complaint in the N.D.N.Y., naming eleven Defendants: (1) The New York State Unified Court System (“UCS”); (2) ACS, a/k/a NYC Children;[3](3) the New York State Office of Children and Family Services (“OCFS”); (4) the New York State Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”); (5) Beverly Stanley, Appeals Coordinator of the Kings County Family Court; (6) Sheila Poole, Commissioner of OCFS; (7) Janet DiFiore, former Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals; (8) Jacqueline Williams, Kings County Family Court Judge; (9) Rosmil Almonte, an attorney with ACS; (10) Travis Johnson, a staff attorney with The Legal Aid Society (“Legal Aid”); and (11) Margaret Ingoglia, Plaintiff's child's mother. Malek I, Compl. at 1. The original complaint, liberally construed, alleges, among other things, violations of Plaintiff's civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”), id. at 3, and seeks a court order that he be allowed to attend church with his child, injunctive relief related to the Family Court Proceeding, the transfer of his state cases to federal court, and money damages. Id. at 5. On February 2, 2022, Plaintiff filed a letter indicating, among other things, that he “wish[ed] to also file an amended / supplemental pleading.” Malek I, ECF No. 5.
On February 22, 2022, before the N.D.N.Y. had responded to Plaintiff's request to file a supplemental pleading, Plaintiff filed a second complaint in a new action. Malek v. N.Y.State Unified Ct. Sys., et al. (“Malek II”), No. 22-cv-6515, ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”). Plaintiff s complaint in Malek II named fourteen Defendants-seven of whom were previously named in Malek I[4]and seven new Defendants: (1) John Doe/Jane Doe, employees of UCS; (2) Kamil Boyce, a UCS employee; (3) Ardaisha Hudson, an ACS employee; (4) John Doe, a/k/a “Mistele Fortune;” (5) Amy Serlin, a private attorney; (6) Legal Aid; and (7) J.P.I., Plaintiff's child's halfsibling.[5]Malek II, Compl. at 1. The Malek II complaint, liberally construed, once again alleges violations of Plaintiff's civil rights under Section 1983, id. at 2-3, and seeks the previously sought relief related to Plaintiff's ongoing state court proceedings, as well as custody of his child, id at 13. Specifically, Plaintiff requested that the Court immediately grant him custody of his child, forbid visitation between his child and his child's mother, stay all state court proceedings, refer any criminal violations alleged in the complaint to the U.S. Attorney's Office, and money damages exceeding ACS's annual budget of four billion dollars. Id.
Between April and June 2022, OCFS, UCS, DiFiore, Poole, Williams, and Stanley (“State Defendants”), ACS and Almonte (“City Defendants”), and Defendant Travis Johnson, of Legal Aid, moved the N.D.N.Y. to dismiss the complaint in Malek I for improper venue, lack of jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim. Malek I ECF Nos. 27, 61, 70, 79. During that same three-month period, Pla...
To continue reading
Request your trial