Gordon v. Gordon

Background

Catherine Gordon filed this action without a lawyer. On August 28, 2025, the court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. In the same order, it denied as moot her request that the court seek free legal representation for her. The clerk entered judgment that day.

Gordon then filed a letter asking the court to reverse its decision denying her request for counsel. She later filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The district court treated her letter as a motion for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), which permits a court to relieve a party from an order or judgment for specified reasons.

Jurisdiction and analysis

The court determined that it could consider the motion even though Gordon had filed a notice of appeal. Ordinarily, a notice of appeal transfers control over the appealed issues to the appeals court. But the federal appellate rules allow a district court to decide a timely motion under Rule 60. Gordon filed her request within 28 days after judgment, so the district court had authority to consider it.

The court concluded that Gordon had not shown any reason for relief under any part of Rule 60(b). Because the case had been dismissed and was closed, she had not demonstrated a reason to reconsider the earlier decision that her request for counsel was moot. The court stated that a request for free counsel to represent her in the appeal must be directed to the Second Circuit at the appropriate time.

Rulings

The court denied Gordon’s motion for reconsideration. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied her permission to appeal without paying court fees.