In Re Andrew Delaney
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-00963
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Re Andrew Delaney: Judge Swain remanded Delaney’s attempted bankruptcy-case removal because the removal statute did not allow it.
Andrew Delaney’s attempt to remove his bankruptcy case was rejected; the action was remanded to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York, and the Southern District of New York action was closed.
What happened
In Re Andrew Delaney involved Andrew Delaney’s request to move his bankruptcy case from the federal bankruptcy court in the Eastern District of New York to the Southern District of New York. Delaney appeared without a lawyer and argued that claims connected to other lawsuits supported the move.
The court explained that the law he relied on allows certain claims from state-court lawsuits to be moved to the federal district court where those state lawsuits are pending. It does not allow a bankruptcy case pending in one federal district to be moved to a different federal district.
Judge Swain ruled that the removal was improper and remanded the action to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York. The order also closed the action in the Southern District of New York.
The detailed version
- In Re Andrew Delaney · No. 1:25-cv-00963
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 11, 2025
Background
Andrew Delaney, who resides in the Republic of the Philippines and appeared without a lawyer, asked the Southern District of New York to remove his bankruptcy case from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York. The district court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees in advance.
Delaney relied primarily on 28 U.S.C. § 1452(a). He appeared to argue that his counterclaims in a federal civil action and his claims in a New York state-court civil action were assets outside the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction and supported removing the bankruptcy case. The opinion notes that Delaney was not a party to the federal civil action at issue and that the New York state-court action was listed as disposed on the New York court system’s website.
Court’s reasoning
Section 1452(a) permits a party to remove a claim or cause of action in a civil action to the federal district court for the district where that civil action is pending, when the district court has bankruptcy jurisdiction over the claim or cause of action. The court interpreted this provision as covering qualifying claims or actions pending in state court. It does not authorize removal of a bankruptcy case pending in a federal bankruptcy court in another judicial district.
The court also noted that Delaney did not seek to remove a claim or cause of action pending in a state court within the Southern District of New York. Instead, he sought to move a bankruptcy case from a federal bankruptcy court in the Eastern District of New York to the Southern District of New York. The court concluded that this removal did not comply with the requirements of Section 1452(a). The court further stated that the other statutory provisions Delaney cited were not bases for removing an action.
Ruling
Judge Laura Taylor Swain remanded the action to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York because removal of the bankruptcy case was improper. The clerk was directed to send the order to the clerk of that bankruptcy court, and the order states that the district-court action was closed.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.