Hammer v. Town of Bedford New York
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:25-cv-02618
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Hammer v. Town of Bedford New York, Judge Seibel denied Hammer’s motion to transfer the case from White Plains to Manhattan.
The ruling directly affected Melanie Hammer’s request to move the case to Manhattan; the case remained assigned to the White Plains courthouse.
What happened
In Hammer v. Town of Bedford New York, Melanie Hammer asked to move her case from the White Plains courthouse to Foley Square in Manhattan. She argued that local political and professional connections created a risk of bias and that Manhattan would be more convenient for her.
Judge Seibel said Hammer had not shown any connection between the court and the people or law firm she identified that would cause a reasonable person to question the court’s fairness. The judge also noted that the defendants and witnesses appeared to be in Westchester, where the events occurred, and that the case was properly assigned to White Plains.
Judge Seibel found no basis for transferring the case and denied the motion. The court also described the application as frivolous and suggested that its timing raised concerns about trying to select a different judge.
The detailed version
- Hammer v. Town of Bedford New York · No. 7:25-cv-02618
- Cathy Seibel
- June 2, 2025
Background
Melanie Hammer, who is representing herself and is an attorney, asked the court to transfer the case from White Plains to Foley Square in Manhattan. She cited 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which allows a federal court to transfer a case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. She also relied on concerns about judicial impartiality under 28 U.S.C. § 455.
Hammer argued that the law firm Keane & Beane had longstanding political and governmental connections in Westchester County and that Anthony Scarpino, Jr. had held prominent public positions there. She also alleged that two defendants worked at Keane & Beane and that her tenant was a close relative of Scarpino. The court noted that neither Keane & Beane nor Scarpino was a party to the case.
In supplemental filings, Hammer alleged an ongoing professional relationship between Keane & Beane and Judge Seibel. She pointed out that one defendant had represented a party in a case before Judge Seibel and that Keane & Beane had appeared in seven other cases before the judge. She argued that defense counsel might benefit from familiarity or deference unavailable to a self-represented plaintiff.
Court’s Analysis
The court called the application frivolous. Judge Seibel stated that she knew Keane & Beane and its lawyers only in her capacity as a judge, did not know Scarpino, and had no outside social or personal relationship with anyone involved in the case. The court concluded that the firm’s prior appearances before the judge did not create a relationship that would cause a reasonable person to question impartiality.
The court also explained that a judge’s opinions formed from prior proceedings are generally not grounds for disqualification unless they show deeply rooted favoritism or hostility that would make fair judgment impossible. The court found that Hammer had not approached that standard. It further rejected the argument that the judge would be presumptively biased after some number of appearances by a firm or lawyer.
The court rejected convenience as a reason for transfer as well. It noted that Hammer’s residence was in Westchester, that the defendants and witnesses appeared to be located there, and that Hammer herself alleged that the relevant events occurred in Westchester County. The court stated that the case was properly assigned to White Plains under the Southern District of New York’s division-of-business rule.
Disposition
After considering the standards under Sections 455 and 1404, Judge Seibel denied the motion. The opinion did not state that the motion was granted in part or dismissed, and it did not add a prejudice qualifier to the denial.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.