Among the many weapons a court has is the rarely used injunction against future case filings.  After all, it’s a citizen’s right to sue.  One of our favorite New Yorker cartoons is the young child asking her mom when she will be old enough to sue someone.  Plaintiff in this case won’t be suing anyone until Justice James gives permission. 

In Capogrosso v. Kansas ;2009 NY Slip Op 01916 ; Decided on March 19, 2009 ; Appellate Division, First Department  we see plaintiff’s case dismissed on statute of limitations grounds.  Plaintiff is herself an attorney.  The Appellate Division agreed that prior approval was necessary in the future.
 

"Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered July 24, 2007, in an action for legal malpractice, dismissing the complaint pursuant to an order, which, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint and enjoined plaintiff from initiating any further litigation without prior approval of the administrative judge of the court in which she seeks to bring a further motion or future action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff’s action for legal malpractice is barred by the statute of limitations, which began to run no later than the day the order dismissing her underlying medical malpractice action was entered (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 298 [2002]). The injunction barring plaintiff from initiating further litigation without prior court approval was justified in light of the evidence of plaintiff’s repeated abuse of the judicial process
and her penchant for vexatious conduct (Sassower v Signorelli, 99 AD2d 358 [1984]).