A federal court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Amari J. Moody against officials from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court ruled that it did not have the authority to review actions taken by the Second Circuit. This decision affects Moody, who sought damages and other relief from the court officials.

The case, titled Moody v. Wolfe, was filed in the District Court for the District of Columbia under Civil Action No. 2026-2410. The court's ruling was issued by Judge Trevor N. McFadden on October 28, 2026. Moody, a resident of Georgia, filed the lawsuit pro se, meaning he represented himself without an attorney.

Moody's complaint alleged that the Second Circuit allowed federal administrative officers, who he claimed had no judicial authority, to take actions across more than twenty federal appellate proceedings over a six-month period. He sought damages and equitable relief, including a request to void the actions taken by the defendants and to direct the Chief Judge of the Second Circuit to take corrective actions.

The court determined that it could not entertain Moody's request to revisit actions taken by the Second Circuit or its staff. The court stated, "[I]t seems axiomatic that a lower court may not order the judges or officers of a higher court to take an action." This ruling was based on established legal precedents that affirm federal district courts generally lack appellate jurisdiction over other judicial bodies.

In addition, the court found that the defendants named in the lawsuit were immune from suit for damages. The ruling referenced the principle of judicial immunity, which protects judges and court staff from being sued for actions taken in their official capacities. The court noted, "A court and its staff will not be deprived of immunity because the action . . . was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of . . . authority."

As a result, the court dismissed Moody's complaint without prejudice, meaning he may have the opportunity to refile it in the future if he can address the issues identified by the court. The court also denied Moody's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, which raised similar allegations as those in his complaint.

This ruling highlights the limitations of federal district courts in reviewing actions taken by higher courts and their officials. It reinforces the principle that judicial immunity protects court staff from legal actions related to their official duties.

The dismissal of Moody's case could impact other individuals who may consider filing similar lawsuits against court officials. It serves as a reminder that litigants must carefully consider the jurisdictional boundaries and the principles of judicial immunity when pursuing legal action against court personnel.

Looking ahead, it is unclear whether Moody will appeal the court's decision. The ruling allows him to seek reconsideration with the Second Circuit or to file a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court if he believes there are grounds for further legal action.