Brennerman v. United States
- Richard Sullivan
- 1:23-cv-01624
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brennerman v. United States, Judge Sullivan declined to docket a non-cognizable letter, sealed it, and noted Brennerman’s appeals had been withdrawn.
Raheem J. Brennerman, whose letter was not docketed but was kept under seal; the court and its docket administration were also directly affected.
What happened
In Brennerman v. United States, Raheem J. Brennerman sent the court a letter claiming that an earlier order improperly concealed his submissions and seeking relief for alleged misconduct.
The court said the letter did not make a recognizable request for relief. It therefore took no action on the letter and did not place it on the docket, but kept a copy under seal for possible appellate review and possible future sanctions. The court also explained that the Second Circuit had treated Brennerman’s appeals from the denials of his motions as withdrawn.
Judge Richard J. Sullivan directed the clerk to mail Brennerman a copy of the order. The order did not decide the underlying issues raised in Brennerman’s motions.
The detailed version
- Brennerman v. United States · No. 1:23-cv-01624
- Richard Sullivan
- July 26, 2023
Background
The order concerns a July 18, 2023 letter from Raheem J. Brennerman. The letter asserted that the court’s July 11, 2023 order was an improper effort to conceal Brennerman’s earlier submissions and requested relief from what Brennerman called the court’s misconduct. The caption also identifies a related criminal matter, No. 17-cr-337 (RJS).
Court’s action on the letter
The court stated that the letter, like Brennerman’s earlier submissions, did not make a cognizable request for relief—that is, it did not present a request the court could properly decide. The court therefore said it would not respond to or take any action concerning the letter and would not docket it.
The court nevertheless directed that a copy be maintained under seal to facilitate appellate review and in case the court later needed to consider sanctions. The court specifically mentioned the possibility of a filing injunction that would bar Brennerman from filing submissions without first obtaining the court’s permission. The order did not impose that injunction.
Appeals
The order also addressed Brennerman’s representation that he had voluntarily withdrawn his appeal from the denial of his motion for reconsideration because it duplicated an existing appeal from the denial of his omnibus motion seeking collateral relief. The court advised that, if Brennerman believed either appeal remained pending, the Second Circuit had deemed both appeals withdrawn.
Disposition
The court did not grant or deny the relief requested in the letter. It declined to docket or act on the submission, kept a copy under seal, and directed the clerk to mail Brennerman a copy of the order. Judge Richard J. Sullivan signed the order as a United States Circuit Judge sitting by designation.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.