Wynder, JR. v. Goltzer, Esq.

Background

Kenneth N. Wynder, Jr. brought the action without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee against the Estate of George Goltzer, Ying Stafford, and Jeremy Schneider. The defendants had represented him in connection with his federal criminal trial as court-appointed attorneys under the Criminal Justice Act. Wynder alleged that Goltzer and Stafford performed inadequately during the trial and that Schneider failed to pursue certain post-trial and sentencing issues. He alleged that this conduct caused his guilty verdict and incarceration.

Wynder asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel and his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due-process rights. The court also construed the complaint to assert state-law legal-malpractice claims. Wynder sought at least $5 million from each defendant, as well as declaratory relief. The opinion states that he was serving a criminal sentence and that his appeal remained unresolved.

Federal Claims

The court held that the Section 1983 claims failed because Section 1983 requires conduct fairly attributable to state authority. Court-appointed defense attorneys performing their traditional functions as criminal defense lawyers do not act under state authority for this purpose. The court therefore dismissed the Section 1983 claims.

The court also discussed the rule from Heck v. Humphrey, which generally bars a damages or declaratory-relief claim under Section 1983 when success would necessarily imply that a conviction or sentence is invalid, unless the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated. The court concluded that Wynder’s ineffective-assistance claims would necessarily imply that his conviction or sentence was invalid and that his conviction had not been invalidated. The opinion also states that this discussion was unnecessary to the result because the claims independently failed for lack of state action.

State-Law Malpractice Claims

Applying New York law, the court held that a legal-malpractice claim arising from a criminal proceeding must allege innocence or a legally sufficient claim of innocence. Under the New York rule applied by the court, an intact conviction prevents the plaintiff from asserting innocence in a civil malpractice action. Because Wynder did not allege that his conviction had been overturned and instead alleged that he was serving a sentence, the court dismissed the malpractice claims.

Disposition

The court denied leave to amend because amendment would be futile: the federal claims could not allege the required state action against these court-appointed attorneys, and the state-law malpractice claims were barred while Wynder’s conviction remained intact. The action was dismissed without leave to amend. The Section 1983 claims were dismissed with prejudice. The state-law malpractice claims were dismissed without prejudice, meaning the court stated that Wynder could pursue them in a separate action if his conviction is ultimately overturned. The court denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees, directed the Clerk to enter judgment for the defendants, terminated pending motions, and closed the case.