Bey v. Brann

Background

Vicky Ware Bey, appearing without a lawyer, filed a notice seeking to move an action pending in Kings County Supreme Court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. On April 4, 2022, the court ruled that the removal was improper and remanded the action to the state court. The court gave two reasons: Bey was the plaintiff in the state-court action, and only a defendant can remove an action; and the Eastern District of New York would have been the proper federal district for a removal by a party authorized to remove because that district covers the location of the state-court action.

Motions

Bey then moved for reconsideration of the remand ruling. She stated that she was a “crime victim” and that the defendants had violated her rights in the state-court action. She also asked for permission to use electronic case filing.

Court’s reasoning

The court relied on 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d), which generally bars review of an order remanding a removed case to the state court from which it came. The court explained that this bar prevents both an appeal and reconsideration by the district court when the remand is based on a removal defect or lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Because the case had already been remanded to Kings County Supreme Court, the federal court no longer had jurisdiction to take further action.

Disposition

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain denied Bey’s motion for reconsideration and her motion for permission for electronic case filing. The court terminated all other pending matters, directed the clerk not to accept further submissions under the closed case number except papers directed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.