Brown v. Webb
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-06493
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brown v. Webb, Judge Swain directed Paula Brown’s complaint to be treated as a Crime Victims’ Rights Act motion in a criminal case and administratively closed this case.
Paula Brown and her minor grandson, D.D.; the complaint was redirected to the related federal criminal case, and Brown v. Webb was administratively closed.
What happened
In Brown v. Webb, Paula Brown, who represented herself, brought an action for herself and her minor grandson, D.D. She complained that their rights under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act were denied and sought restitution in connection with a federal criminal case.
The court treated the complaint as a motion that belonged in the related criminal case rather than as a separate civil action. The court directed the Clerk of Court to file it there and to keep the complaint and related application restricted as previously ordered.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the court clerk to administratively close Brown v. Webb and terminated all other pending matters in the case. The court also denied the right to proceed without paying filing fees on any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Webb · No. 1:22-cv-06493
- Laura Swain
- Nov. 30, 2022
Background
Paula Brown appeared without a lawyer and brought the action on behalf of herself and her grandson, D.D., who is a minor. The complaint arose from a federal criminal action in the same court. Brown alleged a denial of rights under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, a federal law, and sought restitution.
Court’s action
The court construed the complaint as a motion under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act that should be filed in the related criminal case, rather than handled as a separate civil action. The court directed the Clerk of Court to:
1. File the complaint as a motion in the criminal action under docket number 17-CR-0644-12 (NSR); and 2. Administratively close Brown v. Webb under docket number 22-CV-6493 (LTS).
The court directed that the complaint remain restricted under its earlier order. That earlier order had removed D.D.’s full name from the docket, listed him by his initials, and restricted electronic access to the complaint and an application to proceed without paying filing fees. The court also stated that all other pending matters in this case were terminated.
Appeal-related ruling
The court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied the right to proceed without paying filing fees for purposes of an appeal.
Result
This order did not decide whether Brown’s Crime Victims’ Rights Act claims were valid or whether restitution should be awarded. It redirected the filing to the criminal case and administratively closed this civil case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.