Torres v. U.S Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-02774
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
Torres v. U.S. Court of Appeals was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because Torres alleged no concrete injury, Judge Swain ruled.
Wilfredo Torres’s claims against the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit were dismissed; the opinion also addressed whether Judge Laura Taylor Swain had to recuse herself.
What happened
In Torres v. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Wilfredo Torres, appearing without a lawyer, claimed the Second Circuit violated due process by returning his judicial-misconduct complaints.
The court ruled that Torres had not shown a concrete, personal injury that the court could remedy, so he lacked the required basis to sue in federal court. It also said the judicial-misconduct statute did not give him a private lawsuit to force review of his complaints.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, declined to allow an amendment, terminated the other pending matters, and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Torres v. U.S Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · No. 1:22-cv-02774
- Laura Swain
- June 21, 2022
Background
Wilfredo Torres, proceeding without a lawyer, sued the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. He alleged that the Second Circuit violated his right to due process when it returned three judicial-misconduct complaints that he had filed under 28 U.S.C. § 351 et seq. The opinion does not state why the Second Circuit returned the complaints.
The complaints concerned alleged misconduct by several judges, including Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain, Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston of the Second Circuit, and Judge John P. Cronan. The allegations arose from judicial actions in Torres’s other district-court cases and appeals. Torres had been allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis.
Recusal
The court considered whether Judge Swain had to step aside because Torres had attempted to file a misconduct complaint against her. The court found no basis for recusal. It explained that Torres’s complaint appeared to stem from his disagreement with the dismissal of an earlier Freedom of Information Act case and that he alleged no facts showing deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible.
Jurisdiction and claims against the Second Circuit
The court held that Torres lacked standing, meaning he had not shown the concrete injury required for a federal court to hear his case. Although Torres alleged that the Second Circuit returned his misconduct complaints, he did not allege a concrete and particularized injury caused by that action.
The court explained that Section 351 provides a forum for filing judicial-misconduct complaints but does not entitle the person filing the complaint to individual relief or consideration. It also stated that the statute does not create a private right of action allowing a complainant to require judicial review of the complaint’s handling. Because Torres alleged no injury that a favorable court decision could remedy, the court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.
Disposition
The court dismissed Torres’s complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3). It declined to give Torres an opportunity to amend because the defects could not be fixed by amendment. The court terminated all other pending matters and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denying Torres fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.