Brown v. National Basketball Association
- Gregory Woods
- 1:19-cv-06434
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Brown v. National Basketball Association, Judge Woods explained prior dismissals, directed Brown not to email chambers, and denied fee-free status for appeal.
Kimberly Bernice Brown, the National Basketball Association, and Tamera Young; the order also addresses procedures for people representing themselves in court.
What happened
In Brown v. National Basketball Association, Kimberly Bernice Brown contacted the court about her claims against the National Basketball Association and Tamera Young and asked about moving the case to another district. The court said it could not advise her on how to pursue the case.
The order explained that the claims against the National Basketball Association had been dismissed for failure to state a claim, while the claims against Tamera Young had been dismissed without prejudice because the case was filed in the wrong place. The order did not decide whether Brown could file a new case elsewhere or whether the case could be transferred.
Judge Gregory H. Woods directed Brown not to email the court’s chambers account and explained how people without lawyers could submit filings by email during the pandemic. The court also denied Brown permission to proceed without paying fees on an appeal, finding that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Brown v. National Basketball Association · No. 1:19-cv-06434
- Gregory Woods
- May 19, 2020
Background
On May 13, 2020, the court received another email from Kimberly Bernice Brown. Brown wrote that she wanted her claims against Tamera Young, in connection with the National Basketball Association, moved to the proper venue. She also stated that she was retaining counsel and asked how to challenge the court’s earlier decision.
Prior dispositions described by the court
The order stated that Brown’s claims against the National Basketball Association had been dismissed for failure to state a claim. It also stated that her claims against Tamera Young had been dismissed without prejudice on the basis of improper venue. A dismissal without prejudice does not itself bar refiling, but this order did not decide whether Brown could file a new case in another district or whether a dismissed case could be transferred. The court suggested that Brown ask her counsel about those questions.
Court’s directives and disposition
The court said it could not provide Brown with guidance about how to prosecute her case. It directed her not to email the court’s chambers email account. The order explained that, during the COVID-19 pandemic, people representing themselves could submit filings by email to the address designated on the court’s website.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying the required fees for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Brown and the defendants by first-class and certified mail and record service on the docket.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addressed filing procedures, communications with chambers, and fee status for an appeal. It did not decide whether Brown’s claims were legally valid, and it did not rule on her request to transfer the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.