Sun v. New York City Police Department
- Laura Swain
- 1:18-cv-11002
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Sun v. New York City Police Department, Judge Swain confirmed appeal filings, explained disqualification procedures, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Yi Sun, the two cases identified in the order, and the handling of Sun’s appeals and disqualification request.
What happened
In Sun v. New York City Police Department and the related Sun v. Saslovsky matter, Yi Sun asked the court to confirm that her appeal notices and payments were properly received and to explain its authority to deny her request to disqualify the court.
The court confirmed that the appeal notices in both cases were docketed and sent to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. It also reported that neither court received the payments Sun said she had submitted. The court explained that disqualification complaints must be directed to the appropriate court of appeals clerk, that such a request does not automatically prevent the district judge from continuing to handle the case, and that Sun’s request offered no proper basis for finding bias.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain explained that the court could continue presiding and denied the recusal request. She also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status. The clerk was directed to file the order in both cases.
The detailed version
- Sun v. New York City Police Department · No. 1:18-cv-11002
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 22, 2020
Background
The court addressed Yi Sun’s October 13, 2020 letter in two cases. Sun asked for confirmation that her notices of appeal and payments had been received and processed correctly. She also asked about the court’s authority to issue its recent order denying her request to disqualify the court.
Appeal filings and payments
The court stated that Sun’s notices of appeal had been docketed in both cases and transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit under the court’s procedures for processing paper filings submitted by a person without a lawyer. The notices were stamped as received on October 3, 2020, and entered on October 9, 2020. The Clerk’s Office reported that the district court had received no payment for the appeals because no payments were found with the notices. The Second Circuit’s administrative manager likewise received Sun’s documents submitted through the drop box but no payments.
Disqualification request
The court explained that a complaint seeking disqualification under 28 U.S.C. §§ 351 et seq. was improperly directed to the district court. Under 28 U.S.C. § 351(a), such a complaint must be directed to the clerk of the appropriate court of appeals. The court also stated that filing a disqualification request does not automatically stop the assigned district judge from presiding. The court had not been told that the court of appeals had taken action to change the assignment. To the extent Sun’s request was directed to Judge Swain, the court denied it because, as stated in the earlier order, the application provided no proper basis for accusing the judge of bias.
Disposition
Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied fee-free appeal status. The clerk was directed to file the order in both captioned matters, and chambers was directed to provide Sun with a copy.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.