Delgado v. The People of the State of New York
- Clarke's
- 7:24-cv-09071
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Delgado v. The People, Judge Clarke's order stated that the case was closed and directed the clerk to terminate docket entry 12.
Joleen Delgado and the case were directly affected: the order stated that the case was closed, directed termination of docket entry 12, and said that no further filings should be made in connection with the case.
What happened
Delgado v. The People of the State of New York concerns an appeal challenging a federal court’s handling of a case that had been sent back to state court. The provided text includes Joleen Delgado’s opening brief, which argues that the remand violated her right to be heard and ignored her constitutional claims.
The brief asks the appeals court to reverse the remand, keep the case in federal court, and require a hearing before any further remand. These are Delgado’s arguments, not rulings by the court. The provided text does not explain the original dispute or decide whether those arguments are correct.
The court’s March 6, 2025, order stated that the case was closed, directed the clerk to terminate docket entry 12, and said that no further filings should be made in connection with the case. The order was signed by Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke. It does not expressly state that any motion was granted or denied.
The detailed version
- Delgado v. The People of the State of New York · No. 7:24-cv-09071
- Clarke's
- Mar. 6, 2025
What the court did
The court stated: “As stated at ECF No. 11, this case is closed.” It directed the clerk to terminate ECF No. 12 and stated that there were to be no further filings connected with the case. The order does not identify the nature of ECF Nos. 11 or 12 and does not expressly say that a motion was granted, denied, or dismissed.
Arguments in the provided brief
The text also contains Joleen Delgado’s opening brief in an appeal. Delgado argues that the district court improperly remanded a case to state court without giving her an opportunity to be heard. She asserts that the remand violated due-process protections and disregarded federal constitutional claims, including claims she associates with 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and federal removal statutes.
Delgado asks the appeals court to reverse the remand order, retain federal jurisdiction, and require a full hearing before any further remand. The brief also argues that state-court proceedings continued after removal and that the district court treated Delgado as an “officer of the court” rather than as a person proceeding on her own behalf.
What is not decided in the provided text
The brief’s assertions are party arguments, not findings by the court. The provided order does not analyze the original case, the remand, federal jurisdiction, due process, or the constitutional claims. It therefore does not show that the court reached the merits of those issues. Based on the text provided, the court’s action is best classified as a procedural order closing the case. Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke signed the order.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.