Carter v. Sewell

Background

Darryl C. Carter, proceeding without a lawyer, moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73(b)(3) to vacate, or cancel, the court’s referral of certain proceedings to a magistrate judge. The referral covered general pretrial matters, dispositive motions, and Carter’s then-pending order to show cause concerning the Southern District of New York help desk. Carter objected to the magistrate judge’s denial of his request for service by publication and argued that the referral prejudiced him and burdened his constitutional rights.

Court’s analysis

Rule 73(b)(3) permits a district judge to vacate a referral when a party shows “extraordinary circumstances.” The court described that standard as difficult to satisfy. It also explained that Rule 73 principally concerns a party’s consent to have a magistrate judge handle a case for all purposes, while this case had been referred for certain purposes under a different statutory provision. The court nevertheless assumed, for purposes of its ruling, that Rule 73 applied. After reviewing Carter’s submissions, it found that he had not shown extraordinary circumstances.

Disposition

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon denied Carter’s motion to vacate the referral. The court separately warned Carter not to abuse his opportunity to litigate, citing his motions concerning alleged misconduct by the court’s help desk or PACER facility and alleged problems with the U.S. Marshals Service. The opinion does not state that the court resolved the underlying claims against the defendants.