Commissioner of Motor Vehicles v. Amelio

Background

Defendants removed a case from the Connecticut Superior Court’s Criminal and Motor Vehicle Session to the Southern District of New York on May 7, 2024. The case involved Saverio Amelio’s alleged violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 14-299, which requires drivers to comply with traffic-control signals. Carmine P. Amelio also asked to proceed without paying filing fees.

The court previously remanded the case because the removal was filed in the wrong federal district. It also denied the fee-waiver application because it omitted important information and certified that an appeal from the remand order would not be taken in good faith. A good-faith certification determines whether a person may proceed without paying fees on appeal. Amelio then moved for reconsideration.

Court’s Reasoning

The court held that reconsideration of the appeal certification was unwarranted. It explained that federal law allows a district court to return a removed case on its own for procedural defects when the defect is identified within 30 days after removal. The proper federal venue was the District of Connecticut, because that district serves the Connecticut state court from which the case was removed. The court issued its remand order three days after the notice of removal.

The court also identified additional defects in the removal. The notice did not include the underlying state-court documents required by federal removal law. Although Amelio claimed diversity jurisdiction and alleged that more than $75,000 was at stake, the court found that allegation implausible. The state court docket showed that the matter was an open traffic ticket, and the Connecticut fee schedule showed a total amount due of $139 for the relevant infraction.

The court further stated that a remand order issued for these procedural defects under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) could not be reviewed on appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d). For those reasons, it certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the current order or the earlier orders would not be taken in good faith.

Disposition

The court denied Amelio’s motion for reconsideration of the certification that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-waiver status for an appeal from the current order and the orders at Docket Entries 4 and 7. The court stated that Amelio could amend the fee-waiver application for this case if he wished. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motions at Docket Entries 8 and 10.