Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9 (2d Cir. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9 (2d Cir. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
69 citation events (53 in the last 25 years) across 14 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Lensendro v. Keybank, N.A., No. 24-2609 (2d Cir. July 1, 2025)
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990 2008 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 11 Considering sanctions for abusive litigation conduct32 citing caseswarning litigant that fifing future frivolous appeals could result in sanctions2 citing courts put it this way
  • Lensendro v. Keybank, N.A., No. 24-2609 (2d Cir. July 1, 2025).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989).
  • Trivedi v. Gen. Elec. Co., No. 23-254 (2d Cir. July 3, 2024).unpublished
    Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989).
  • Daniel v. T&M Prot. Res., LLC, No. 23-7557 (2d Cir. June 25, 2024).unpublished
    This 12 Court’s procedure for imposing leave-to-file sanctions involves three steps: (1) 13 warning the litigant that future frivolous filings could result in sanctions, see 14 Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curi…
  • Doe v. East Lyme Bd. Of Educ., No. 3:11-cv-00291 (D. Conn. June 10, 2022).
    “abused the judicial process to harass defendants with vexations and frivolous suits”
  • Johnson v. Vera House, No. 5:22-cv-00451 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. Bond, Schoeneck & King LLC, No. 5:22-cv-00446 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. Monro Muffler Brake & Serv., No. 5:22-cv-00441 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. Schenectdy Cnty. EFCU, No. 5:22-cv-00456 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. Black River Apts., No. 5:22-cv-00452 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. Synchrony Bank, No. 5:22-cv-00450 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
Show 22 more citing cases
  • Johnson v. Rosetti, No. 5:22-cv-00442 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. Bitrategaming, No. 5:22-cv-00448 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. Rushlow Enter., Inc., No. 5:22-cv-00440 (N.D.N.Y. May 11, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Johnson v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, No. 5:22-cv-00466 (N.D.N.Y. May 10, 2022).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226 , 229 S.D.N.Y. – N.Y.C., 19-cv-7337, Woods, J. (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam).
  • Nath v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., No. 17-2019 (2d Cir. July 24, 2018).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989). 4
  • Nath v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., 732 F. App'x 85 (2d Cir. 2018).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989). 5
  • In re Nath, No. 17-1921 (L) (2d Cir. July 24, 2018).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989). 3
  • Richmond v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (P.B. 7, LLC), 691 F. App'x 652 (2d Cir. 2016).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989).
  • Johnson v. Chairman New York City Transit Auth., 377 F. App'x 46 (2d Cir. 2010).unpublished
    See Hong Mai Sa v. Doe, 406 F.3d 155, 158 (2d Cir.2005) (“If a litigant has a history of filing vexatious, harassing or duplicative lawsuits, courts may impose sanctions, including restrictions on future access to the judicial system.”) (i…
  • Jackson v. Sec'y of United States Treasury, 141 F. App'x 8 (2d Cir. 2005).unpublished
    Cf. Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir.1989) (per curiam).
  • 100,000 Victim Families v. Schulte Roth & Zable, 108 F. Supp. 2d 252 (S.D.N.Y. 2000).published
    Bank, 1998 WL 537798 , at *1 (2d Cir.1998) (holding that if the Plaintiff exhibits a pattern of abusive filings in federal court, "the district court would be well within its discretion to impose a `leave to file' requirement or such other…
  • 100,000 Victim Families Note Holders Owners of Sec. in Towers Fina[n]cial Corp. v. Schulte Roth & Zable, 108 F. Supp. 2d 251 (S.D.N.Y. 2000).published
    Bank, 1998 WL 587798 , at *1 (2d Cir.1998) (holding that if the Plaintiff exhibits a pattern of abusive filings in federal court, “the district court would be well within its discretion to impose a ‘leave to file’ requirement or such other…
  • Daniel v. T&M Prot. Res., LLC, No. 22-1614 (2d Cir. May 19, 2023).unpublished
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989). 6
  • Weir v. City of New York, No. 22-426, 2023 WL 3001136 (2d Cir. Apr. 19, 2023).unpublished
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989). 5
  • In re Attorney Grievance Complaint Filed by Peeples, No. 20-90095-am (2d Cir. Feb. 16, 2021).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 228-29 (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989); see also SBC 2010-1, LLC v. Morton, 552 F. App’x 9, 12 (2d Cir. 2013) (summary order; affirming district court’s imposition…
  • Jericho Grp. Ltd. v. Mid-Town Dev. Ltd. P'ship, No. 18-2009 (L) (2d Cir. June 5, 2020).unpublished
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989). 7 We have considered all of the parties’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
  • NSI Int'l v. Mustafa, No. 16-3550-cv (2d Cir. June 8, 2018).unpublished
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir. 1989).
  • Stoner v. Young Concert Artists, Inc., 626 F. App'x 293 (2d Cir. 2015).unpublished
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir.1989).
  • Iwachiw v. Port Auth., 151 F. App'x 93 (2d Cir. 2005).unpublished
    (warning litigant that fifing future frivolous appeals could result in sanctions)
  • Catanzaro v. Wallenstein, 142 F. App'x 540 (2d Cir. 2005).unpublished
    (warning litigant that filing future frivolous appeals could result in sanctions)
  • Sassower v. Abrams, 833 F. Supp. 253 (S.D.N.Y. 1993).published 3 cites
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir.1989).
  • Siino v. NYC Human Resources Admin./Dep't of Soc. Servs., No. 1:14-cv-07217 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2021).
At page 10 Imposing sanctions for vexatious litigation conduct15 citing cases12 listed here
  • W.Y.N.N. v. Larimer, No. 6:22-cv-06352 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 2023).
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir. 1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 10 (2d Cir. 1989).
  • Anghel v. New York State Dep't of Health, 589 F. App'x 28 (2d Cir. 2015).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir.1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 10 (2d Cir.1989).
  • Brown v. Legal Aid Soc'y, 367 F. App'x 215 (2d Cir. 2010).unpublished
    See In re Martin-Trígona, 9 F.3d 226, 229 (2d Cir.1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 10-11 (2d Cir.1989).
  • Rivera ex rel. Net v. Food & Drug Admin., 346 F. App'x 693 (2d Cir. 2009).unpublished 2 cites
    See In re Martin-Trigona, 9 F.3d 226, 227, 229 (2d Cir.1993); Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 10 (2d Cir.1989).
  • Truong v. Kaye, 328 F. App'x 31 (2d Cir. 2009).unpublished 2 cites
    See Hong Mai Sa v. Doe, 406 F.3d 155, 158 (2d Cir.2005) (“If a litigant has a history of filing ‘vexatious, harassing or duplicative lawsuits,’ courts may impose sanctions, including restrictions on future access to the judicial system.”);…
  • Carlin v. Gold Hawk Jt. Venture, 778 F. Supp. 686 (S.D.N.Y. 1991).published
    See, for e.g., In the matter of Hartford Textile Corp., 681 F.2d 895, 896-97 (2d Cir.1982) (issuing injunction after “almost unparalleled history” of over one hundred frivolous and repetitious claims, motions, petitions, demands, and appea…
  • Polur v. Raffe, 912 F.2d 52 (2d Cir. 1990).published 2 cites
    See Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d at 1262-63; Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 10-11 (2d Cir.1989) (per curiam).
  • Moss v. E. on Ag, 118 F. App'x 553 (2d Cir. 2004).unpublished
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 10 (2d Cir.1989) (per curiam).
  • Sassower v. Abrams, 833 F. Supp. 253 (S.D.N.Y. 1993).published 3 cites
    See Sassower v. Sansverie, 885 F.2d 9, 11 (2d Cir.1989).
  • George Sassower v. Gen. Ins. Co. of Am., 962 F.2d 15 (9th Cir. 1992).unpublished
Show 2 more citing cases
Other citing cases8 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
George SASSOWER
v.
Matthew D. SANSVERIE, Denis Dillon, J. Kenneth Littman, Kenneth M. Cozza, Robert Rivers, Mary Rita Wallace, Gerald R. Podlesak, Daniel J. Moore, Nicholas H. Politan, Robert Abrams, Wilfred Feinberg, Charles L. Brieant, William C. Conner, Eugene H. Nickerson, Francis T. Murphy, Milton Molten, Joseph W. Bellacosa, Xavier C. Riccobono, Ira Gammerman, Donald Diamond, Ernest L. Signorelli, Anthony Mastroianni, Kreindler & Relkin, P.C., Citibank, N.A., Lee Feltman, Feltman, Karesch, Major & Farbman, Nachamie, Kirschner, Spizz & Levine, P.C., Rashba & Pokart, Howard M. Bergson, Reisman, Peirez, Reisman, & Calica, Clapp & Eisenber, P.C., Rothbart, Rothbart & Kohn, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Hugh Leonard, Sills, Cumis, Zuckerman, Radin, Tishman, Epstein, & Gross, P.C., Berlin, Kaplan, Dembling & Burke, P.C., Peter Sordi, and Myriam J. Altman
No. 21, Docket 89-7051.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Sep 15, 1989.
Published opinion
885 F.2d 9
1989 WL 106694
1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 14210
George Sassower, White Plains, New York, filed a brief pro se., Feltman, Karesh, Major & Farbman, New York City, pro se., Kreindler & Relkin, P.C., New York City, pro se., and for Citibank, N.A. (Donald B. Relkin and Donald F. Schneider, of counsel), filed a joint brief for Appellees Felt-man, Karesh, Major & Farbman, Lee Felt-man, Clapp & Eisenberg, Kreindler & Rel-kin, P.C. and Citibank, N.A., Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen. of the State of New York, New York City (Ronald Tur-bin, Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel), filed a brief for defendants-appellees., Schneck & Weltman, New York City (Jonathan I. Price, New York City, of counsel), filed a brief for defendants-appellees Rashba & Pokart and Sills Cummis Zucker-man Radin Tischman Epstein & Gross, P.C., Howard M. Bergson, Smithtown, New York, filed a brief for defendants-appellees Nachamie, Kirschner, Spizz & Levine, P.C., Rothbard, Rothbard & Kohn and Defendant-Appellee pro se., Snitow & Pauley, New York City (William H. Pauley, III, Franklyn H. Snitow, of counsel), filed a brief for appellees Honorable Denis Dillon, Nassau County Dist. Atty., Asst. Dist. Attys. Matthew D. San-sverie and J. Kenneth Littman, Police Officer Kenneth M. Cozza, and Mary-Rita Wallace (Nassau County Appellees).
Cardamone, Friedman, Lumbard.
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Korman, J.) enforcing an injunction requiring appellant George Sassower, pro se, to obtain approval of United States Magistrate Ross prior to filing suit in the Eastern District Court Clerk’s office.

I

George Sassower has been an abusive litigant for a number of years, and now presents yet another in a series of lawsuits and motions continuing “the long and tortured history of litigation” in state and federal courts. See Sassower v. Sheriff of Westchester County, 824 F.2d 184, 185 (2d Cir.1987). The details of this long history are a matter of public record. See, e.g., Sassower v. Sheriff of Westchester County, 824 F.2d at 184, Raffe v. Doe, 619 F.Supp. 891 (S.D.N.Y.1985), Raffe v. Citibank, N.A., (No. 84 Civ. 305) (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 1, 1984), aff'd mem., 779 F.2d 37 (2d Cir.1985). In response to this avalanche of litigation, an injunction was issued in district court barring Sassower from filing or intervening in any action against any of the defendants he had been harassing through his vexatious suits. See Raffe v. John Doe, 619 F.Supp. at 898. Despite this court order, appellant continued to file suits, as a result of which he was disbarred from practice in federal and state courts. See In re Sassower, 700 F.Supp. 100, 104 (E.D.N.Y.1988).

Undeterred, Sassower filed the instant action pro se before Judge Korman, who directed the Clerk of the District Court “not to accept any papers, proceeding, or motion or new case of any kind presented[*11] by Mr. George Sassower ... without leave obtained from Magistrate Ross who shall have examined such paper to assure that ... it is not in violation of the [earlier issued] injunction_” Criminal and civil contempt and Rule 11 sanctions were also considered by the district court but not implemented because it concluded that such sanctions would be ineffective in deterring Sassower from filing frivolous appeals. This appeal followed.

II

Sassower’s appeal is frivolous, and the judgment of the district court should be affirmed. He has abused the judicial process to harass defendants with vexations and frivolous suits. This is the sixth appeal he has filed in this Court during the past year. In so doing, he has impaired the ability of this and other courts to discharge their constitutional duties. We have previously assessed the need for interposing an injunction against vexatious litigants. See In Re: Martin-Trigona, 795 F.2d 9 (2d Cir.1986); see also In re McDonald, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 993, 103 L.Ed.2d 158 (1989) (filing of frivolous pro se habeas writs uses up courts’ limited resources).

Sassower imposes similar significant burdens on this Court warranting an injunction. We write in this case to give fair warning to appellant that if he continues to abuse the judicial process by the instigation of frivolous appeals, an injunction will issue directing the Clerk of this Court to refuse to accept for filing any submissions from him, unless he has first obtained leave of the Court to file such papers.

The order enforcing the district court injunction against filing is affirmed.