Askins v. Santos
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-11011
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Askins v. Santos, Judge Swain dismissed the case without prejudice because the complaint did not establish federal court jurisdiction.
Delroy Askins's federal case was dismissed; the dismissal was without prejudice to pursuing an action in state court. Marlene Santos was the defendant.
What happened
Delroy Askins, representing himself, sued his sister, Marlene Santos, alleging that she did not adequately care for their now-deceased mother. Both provided New York addresses, and Askins referred generally to constitutional, civil-rights, human-rights, disability, and wrongful-death claims.
The court ordered Askins to explain why the case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. His declaration did not provide facts showing a federal claim or that he and Santos were citizens of different states, so the court dismissed the case without prejudice to an action in state court.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied Askins permission to proceed without paying fees on an appeal, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and directed the clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Askins v. Santos · No. 1:22-cv-11011
- Laura Swain
- May 2, 2023
Background
Delroy Askins, who was proceeding without a lawyer, sued his sister, Marlene Santos. He alleged that Santos did not adequately care for their now-deceased mother. In his complaint, Askins invoked federal-question jurisdiction and referred generally to alleged violations of his constitutional, civil, human-rights, and Americans with Disabilities Act rights. He also stated that he sought to bring a wrongful-death claim.
The complaint provided New York addresses for both Askins and Santos. The court previously directed Askins to show why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, meaning the court's legal authority to hear the case. Askins responded with a declaration, but the court found that it did not allege facts showing that he and Santos were citizens of different states or add details indicating that his claims arose under federal law.
Court's analysis
The court explained that it must dismiss a complaint filed without the required filing fee if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks money from an immune defendant. It also must dismiss when subject matter jurisdiction is lacking. The court said it must read a self-represented litigant's filings liberally, but concluded that Askins's filings still did not establish federal jurisdiction. The court had also previously determined that the Americans with Disabilities Act did not apply to the facts alleged.
Disposition
The court dismissed Askins's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, without prejudice to any action he seeks to pursue in state court. The court denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. It directed the clerk to enter judgment.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.