Scott Sumter v. Keith
- George Daniels
- 1:21-cv-03723
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Rosemary Scott Sumter v. Jessica Keith, Judge Daniels dismissed the complaint with prejudice for standing and venue defects and denied leave to amend.
Rosemary Scott Sumter’s complaint was dismissed with prejudice, her request to amend was denied, and her discovery-related petitions were closed as moot. The six individuals for whom she attempted to bring claims did not receive a merits ruling on those claims.
What happened
Rosemary Scott Sumter v. Jessica Keith, Craig Lowe, and Raymond Tonkin involved claims brought by Sumter, who was not represented by a lawyer, on behalf of six people she identified as tribal officials. She alleged that those individuals were wrongly arrested, prosecuted, imprisoned, and involuntarily committed in Pennsylvania. The claims were brought under a federal civil-rights law.
The court agreed that Sumter could not pursue injuries allegedly suffered by other people and could not represent a tribal council as a nonlawyer. The court also found that New York was the wrong place for the case because the defendants lived in Pennsylvania and the events occurred there. The court further found that Sumter’s proposed amendments would not fix these problems.
Judge George B. Daniels adopted Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn’s report after finding no clear error. The court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, denied Sumter’s request for leave to amend, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case and two discovery-related petitions as moot.
The detailed version
- Scott Sumter v. Keith · No. 1:21-cv-03723
- George Daniels
- Feb. 17, 2022
Background
Rosemary Scott Sumter, a tribal council member, brought this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on behalf of six people whom she identified as tribal officials. She alleged that Pennsylvania State Police troopers wrongfully arrested those individuals on November 18, 2019; that they were prosecuted using suppressed and fabricated evidence; and that they were falsely imprisoned at the Pike County Correctional Facility and involuntarily committed to the Norristown State Hospital. The defendants were Craig Lowe, identified as the Warden of the Pike County Correctional Facility; Jessica Keith, identified as the Chief Executive Officer of the Norristown State Hospital; and Raymond Tonkin, identified as the District Attorney for Pike County.
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Objections
Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn recommended dismissal and denial of leave to amend. She had previously directed Sumter to explain why the case should not be dismissed because she could not bring claims for other people or an organization and because the case appeared to belong in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. No party objected to the report. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Reasons for Dismissal
The court held that Sumter lacked standing, meaning she had not alleged an injury to herself. Instead, the complaint sought relief for injuries allegedly suffered by the six tribal officials. The court also held that Sumter lacked capacity to represent the tribal council as a corporate entity because she was not an attorney.
The court separately held that venue was improper. The opinion states that the defendants resided in Pennsylvania and that the events giving rise to the claims occurred there. The proper venue was therefore the Middle District of Pennsylvania, not the Southern District of New York, where only Sumter resided. The court also agreed that amendment would be futile because Sumter’s proposed amendments would not cure the standing and venue defects.
Disposition
Judge George B. Daniels adopted Magistrate Judge Netburn’s report in its entirety. The court dismissed Sumter’s complaint with prejudice and denied her motion for leave to amend. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motions and the case. The court also directed the Clerk to close Sumter’s petition for discovery and petition to amend discovery as moot.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.