Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 8, 2025

7 West 21 LI LLC v. Mosseri

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:23-cv-09448
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In 7 West 21 LI LLC v. Mosseri, Judge Cronan remanded the identical proceeding for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and denied fee-free status for any appeal.

Who this affects

7 West 21 LI LLC and Clement Mosseri; the proceeding was sent back to New York City Civil Court, County of New York, Housing Part.

What happened

In 7 West 21 LI LLC v. Mosseri, the defendant removed a proceeding from New York City Civil Court to federal court. The federal court had previously remanded an action between the same parties for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

The plaintiff argued that this was the same action previously remanded and that no relevant circumstances had changed. The defendant did not address the court’s questions about jurisdiction and instead filed a notice of appeal; the Second Circuit later dismissed that appeal.

The court concluded that the proceeding was identical to the earlier case and remanded it to New York City Civil Court, County of New York, Housing Part. Judge John P. Cronan also denied fee-free status for any appeal and allowed the plaintiff to submit a later filing supporting its request for fees and costs.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
7 West 21 LI LLC v. Mosseri · No. 1:23-cv-09448
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Jan. 8, 2025

Background

The defendant removed the proceeding, identified as Index No. L&T 53774/2019, from New York City Civil Court, County of New York, to the Southern District of New York on October 27, 2023. The court had previously remanded an action between the same parties to New York City Civil Court for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

The court then directed the parties to address whether the new proceeding was the same action previously remanded, whether circumstances had changed, and whether federal subject-matter jurisdiction existed. The plaintiff stated that the proceedings were the same, that no relevant circumstances had changed other than the issuance of a final judgment of possession by the Housing Court, and that federal jurisdiction was lacking. The defendant filed a notice of appeal instead of addressing the questions in the court’s order. The Second Circuit dismissed that appeal on July 10, 2024.

Ruling

The court concluded that the proceeding was identical to the action it had previously remanded and that no changed circumstances supported federal subject-matter jurisdiction. It therefore ordered that the proceeding be remanded to New York City Civil Court, County of New York, Housing Part.

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The court did not decide the plaintiff’s request for fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); instead, it gave the plaintiff until January 28, 2025, to file a supporting letter brief and documents.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.