# Piccolo v. New York City Board of Elections

> District Court, S.D. New York · May 9, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11049711

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, S.D. New York
- **Decided:** May 9, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11049711

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #: _________________
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
DATE FILED: 5/9/2025
----------------------------------------------------------------- X
:
ARTHUR PICCOLO, :
:
Plaintiff, : 1:25-cv-2617-GHW
:
-v- : ORDER
:
NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, :
:
Defendant. :
:
------------------------------------------------------------------ X
GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge:
On April 15, 2025, the Court issued an order to show cause why an order should not be
granted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 ordering Defendant to place Plaintiff on the Democratic
primary ballot for the election for New York City mayor. Dkt. No. 17. The Court held a hearing on
the record on May 8, 2025 regarding the matter. For the reasons discussed on the record during
May 8, 2025 hearing, Plaintiff’s application for preliminary injunctive relief is denied.
As discussed during the May 8, 2025 hearing, Defendant is directed to attain a copy of the
transcript of the hearing and to provide that transcript to Plaintiff. Further, should Plaintiff wish to
continue the litigation, Plaintiff is directed to serve a notice on the New York Attorney General
stating the question of the constitutionality of the New York statutes he is challenging, pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1(a). Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, Plaintiff may file his proposed
notice with the Court, and the Court will direct the U.S. Marshals Service to effect service for
Plaintiff. The proposed notice is due no later than May 15, 2025. As discussed during May 8, 2025
hearing, discovery in this case is stayed pending service of the notice on the New York Attorney
General and an answer or other response to the complaint by Defendant.
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order
would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal.
See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at Dkt. Nos. 10, 21.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 9, 2025
New York, New York 2 f
GRE H. WOODS
United States District Judge

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11049711. Public record. Not legal advice.