EXHIBIT A (Ct. App. Dkt. No. 89) Case 21-1493, Document 89, 07/26/2021, 3144257, Page1 of 1 E.D.N.Y. – C. Islip 21-cv-2516 Brown, J. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT _________________ At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 26th day of July, two thousand twenty-one. Present: Susan L. Carney, Richard J. Sullivan, William J. Nardini, Circuit Judges. Pantelis Chrysafis, et al., Plaintiff-Appellants, Housing Court Answers, et al., Plaintiffs, v. 21-1493 Lawrence K. Marks, in his official capacity as Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts of New York State, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appellants move for an emergency injunction pending appeal. Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the Appellants’ motion for an injunction pending appeal is DENIED because the Appellants have failed to meet the requisite standard. See In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig., 503 F.3d 167, 170 (2d Cir. 2007); see also Respect Maine PAC v. McKee, 562 U.S. 996, 996 (2010). FOR THE COURT: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court EXHIBIT B (Ct. App. Dkt. No. 25-6) Case 21-1493, Document 25-6, 06/18/2021, 3122415, Page162 of 173 EXHIBIT P Case 21-1493, Document 25-6, 06/18/2021, 3122415, Page163 of 173 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: Activity in Case 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Chrysafis et al v. Marks et al Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction Date: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 12:55:43 AM [External Email] This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply. U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered on 6/15/2021 at 0:54 AM EDT and filed on 6/15/2021 Case Name: Chrysafis et al v. Marks et al Case Number: 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Filer: WARNING: CASE CLOSED on 06/14/2021 Document Number: No document attached Docket Text: ORDER denying [76] Motion for Preliminary Injunction. For the reasons set forth in the Court's Memorandum and Order, the motion for a preliminary injunction pending appeal is denied. Ordered by Judge Gary R. Brown on 6/15/2021. (Brown, Gary) 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Notice has been electronically mailed to: Laurel R. Kretzing [email protected], [email protected] Edward J Josephson [email protected] Randy M. Mastro [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Susan M. Connolly [email protected] Kimberly Hunt Lee [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Lori L. Pack [email protected] Case 21-1493, Document 25-6, 06/18/2021, 3122415, Page164 of 173 Kimberly Ann Kinirons [email protected] Ellen Beth Davidson [email protected] Akiva Shapiro [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Rachel Kane Moston [email protected] Yungbi Ann Jang [email protected], [email protected] Ian Bergstrom, I [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Lauren Kobrick Myers [email protected] Jessica C. Benvenisty [email protected] 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Notice will not be electronically mailed to: EXHIBIT C (Dist. Ct. Dkt. No. 75) Case 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Document 75 Filed 06/14/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1329 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------X PANTELIS CHRYSAFIS, BETTY COHEN, BRANDIE LACASSE, MUDAN SHI, FENG ZHOU, and RENT STABILIZATION ASSOCIATION OF NYC, INC., Plaintiffs, JUDGMENT - against - CV 21-2516 (GRB)(AYS) LAWRENCE K. MARKS, in his official capacity as Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts of New York State, ADRIAN H. ANDERSON, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Dutchess County, New York, JAMES DZURENDA, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Nassau, New York JOSEPH FUCITO, in his official capacity as Sheriff of New York city, New York, MARGARET GARNETT, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Investigation, and CAROLINE TANG-ALEJANDRO, in her official capacity as Director, Bureau of Marshals, New York City Department of Investigation, Defendants. -----------------------------------------------------------X A Memorandum and Order of Honorable Gary R. Brown, United States District Judge, having been filed on June 11, 2021, denying plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, which has been consolidated with the merits of the underlying action; directing Judgment to be entered in favor of defendant Lawrence K. Marks; dismissing the case as to the remaining defendants for failure to state a claim; and directing the Clerk to enter judgment as above and close the case, it is Case 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Document 75 Filed 06/14/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1330 ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that plaintiffs Pantelis Chrysafis, Betty Cohen, Brandie LaCasse, Mudan Shi, Feng Zhou, and Rent Stabilization Association of NYC, Inc., take nothing of defendants Lawrence K. Marks, Adrian H. Anderson, James Dzurenda, Joseph Fucito, Margaret Garnett, and Caroline Tang-Alejandro; that plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, which has been consolidated with the merits of the underlying action, is denied; that Judgment is entered in favor of defendant Lawrence K. Marks; that the case is dismissed as to the remaining defendants, Adrian H. Anderson, James Dzurenda, Joseph Fucito, Margaret Garnett, and Caroline Tang-Alejandro, for failure to state a claim; and that this case is closed. Dated: June 14, 2021 Central Islip, New York DOUGLAS C. PALMER CLERK OF THE COURT BY: /S/ JAMES J. TORITTO DEPUTY CLERK 2 EXHIBIT D (Dist. Ct. Dkt. No. 74) Case 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Document 74 Filed 06/11/21 Page 1 of 29 PageID #: 1300 FILED CLERK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4:54 pm, Jun 11, 2021 EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK U.S.DISTRICTCOURT --------------------------------------------------------------------X EASTERNDISTRICTOFNEWYORK LONGISLANDOFFICE PANTELIS CHRYSAFIS, BETTY COHEN, BRANDIE LACASSE, MUDAN SHI, FENG MEMORANDUM ZHOU, AND RENT STABILIZATION AND ORDER ASSOCIATION OF NYC, INC., 21-cv-2516 (GRB) Plaintiffs, -against- LAWRENCE K. MARKS, in his official capacity as Chief Administrative Judge of the Court of New York State, ADRIAN H. ANDERSON, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Dutchess County, New York, JAMES DZURENDA, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Nassau County, New York, JOSEPH FUCITO, in his official capacity as Sheriff of New York City, New York, MARGARET GARNETT, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Investigation, and CAROLINE TANG-ALEJANDRO, in her official capacity as Director, Bureau of Marshals, New York City Department of Investigation, Defendants. --------------------------------------------------------------------X GARY R. BROWN, United States District Judge: “Whatever may be thought of the expediency of this statute, it cannot be affirmed to be, beyond question, in palpable conflict with the Constitution. Nor, in view of the methods employed to stamp out the disease of smallpox, can anyone confidently assert that the means prescribed by the state to that end has no real or substantial relation to the protection of the public health and the public safety.” -Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 31 (1905) 1 Case 2:21-cv-02516-GRB-AYS Document 74 Filed 06/11/21 Page 2 of 29 PageID #: 1301 Suffering significant financial hardships from measures aimed at curbing the spread of COVID-19, five small landlords seek to preliminarily enjoin enforcement of New York State’s eviction moratorium and related provisions as unconstitutionally infirm. Plaintiffs have satisfactorily demonstrated a risk of irreparable harm but, particularly given the State’s strong interest in combatting the severe public health emergency, fail to demonstrate a likelihood of success on their constitutional challenges or equities weighing in their favor. Thus, the application for a preliminary injunction is denied. In light of the importance of the matters at issue, the Court has consolidated the merits of the action with this application, which should facilitate appellate review. BACKGROUND A. Procedural History and the Evolving Legal Landscape In early 2020, “New York State enacted a slate of statutes, administrative orders, and executive orders aimed at combatting both the public health risks and economic devastation wrought by the disease.” Melendez v. City of New York, No. 20-CV-5301 (RA), 2020 WL 7705633, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. 2020).1 The initial enactment, Executive Order (“EO”) No. 202.8, entered March 20, 2020, imposed a 90-day moratorium on residential evictions. Id. at *3. Then, on May 7, 2020, EO 202.28 permitted the application of security deposits toward rents due while “temporarily prohibit[ing] landlords from initiating eviction proceedings against tenants who are facing financial hardship due to the pandemic.” Elmsford Apartment Assocs., LLC v. Cuomo, 1 The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic is a subject this Court has discussed at length. See, e.g., United States v.