Mike Simonetti v. Lindsey Kramer/Hoag, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denied Mike Simonetti’s motions for a temporary restraining order and to expand the TRO concerning state-court orders affecting real property. The court concluded that the sole specifically named defendant was a private party not subject to liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and that federal interference with the ongoing state proceeding was unwarranted. The court also ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the amended complaint should not be dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff was not entitled to a temporary restraining order because he failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, one of the required gateway factors for preliminary injunctive relief.
2. The specifically named Defendant could not be held liable under § 1983 on the allegations presented because she was a private individual and was not a state actor.
3. The court would not interfere with the ongoing New Jersey state-court proceeding because Plaintiff did not demonstrate extraordinary circumstances justifying such interference.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff established the required elements for a temporary restraining order.
2. Whether a private individual who is not alleged to be a state actor may be liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
3. Whether the federal court should interfere with an ongoing New Jersey state-court proceeding absent extraordinary circumstances.
4. Whether Plaintiff should be required to show cause why the amended complaint should not be dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Disposition

other