Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

James H. Brady v. New York, et al.

Paid petition · Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, First Judicial Department, No. 154496/15 · judgment February 8, 2018


Certiorari denied · February 19, 2019
Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

As the New York State Attorney General and Manhattan District Attorney were not acting as advocates for the people when they permitted Petitioner's contractual property rights to be rewritten and voided under color of law, did the Appellate Division, First Department err in finding Respondents immune pursuant to Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976)? Has the New York State Courts' misapplication of Imbler resulted in the obstruction of justice and violations of Petitioner's and New York State citizens' Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments rights? Does the Appellate Division, First Department's February 8, 2018 Decision conflict with the case cited, Moore v. Dormin, 252 AD 2d 421 (1st Dept. 1998), which held that "not all discretionary actions are absolutely immune"? Is it unconstitutional for the New York State Courts to force the victim of an unlawful act to pay the litigation fees incurred by the Manhattan District Attorney and the New York State Attorney General?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
James H. Brady

For respondent
Julie Steiner
New York City Law Department

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Feb 19 2019
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Jan 23 2019
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
  3. Jan 15 2019
    Waiver of right of respondent New York County District Attorney's Office to respond filed.
  4. Dec 19 2018
    Waiver of right of respondent The City of New York to respond filed.
  5. Dec 18 2018
    Waiver of right of respondent State of New York, et al. to respond filed.
  6. Nov 28 2018
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 16, 2019)