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 act on or docket Brennerman’s non-cognizable letter but kept a sealed copy for review.
Raheem J. Brennerman’s submission, the court’s docket and sealed records, and the appellate-review process.
What happened
In Brennerman v. United States, Raheem J. Brennerman sent a letter claiming that an earlier court order improperly concealed his submissions and asking for relief from what he called court misconduct.
The court said the letter did not make a request the court could address, so it would not respond to the letter, take action on it, or place it on the docket. The court kept a copy under seal for possible appellate review and possible future sanctions, including an order requiring Brennerman to obtain permission before filing submissions.
Judge Richard J. Sullivan also directed the Clerk of Court to mail Brennerman a copy of the amended order. The order corrected an earlier statement about Brennerman’s appeals: appeal No. 23-242 had been deemed withdrawn, while appeal No. 23-6180 remained pending.
The detailed version
- Brennerman v. United States · No. 1:23-cv-01624
- Richard Sullivan
- July 28, 2023
Background
The amended order addresses a July 18, 2023 letter from Defendant and Plaintiff Raheem J. Brennerman. Brennerman asserted that the court’s July 11, 2023 order improperly tried to conceal his earlier submissions and sought relief from what he described as the court’s misconduct.
Court’s action on the letter
The court concluded that the letter, like Brennerman’s earlier submissions, did not make a cognizable request for relief—that is, a request the court could properly address. The court therefore stated that it would not respond to or take any action concerning the letter. It also stated that the Clerk would not docket the correspondence.
The court nevertheless kept a copy of the submission under seal. It did so to preserve a record for possible appellate review and in case the court later needed to consider sanctions. The court specifically mentioned a possible filing injunction that would prevent Brennerman from filing submissions without first obtaining the court’s permission.
Additional correction and disposition
The Clerk was directed to mail Brennerman a copy of the amended order. In a footnote, the court corrected an error in its July 26, 2023 order: the Second Circuit had deemed Brennerman’s appeal in Case No. 23-242 withdrawn, but his appeal in Case No. 23-6180 remained pending.
Judge Richard J. Sullivan, a United States Circuit Judge sitting by designation, entered the order. The order addressed the handling of Brennerman’s submission and did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.