Wise v. Police
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-09356
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Wise v. Police, Chief Judge Swain ruled that the transferred action was closed in New York and directed Wise to contact the District of New Jersey.
Randal L. Wise, whose concerns and requests must be directed to the District of New Jersey and whose further filings generally will not be accepted under the closed Southern District of New York case number.
What happened
In Wise v. Police, Randal L. Wise submitted a letter and complaint alleging misconduct by federal prosecutors, police, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and an assistant United States attorney in connection with his pending criminal case. The Southern District of New York had already transferred the action to the District of New Jersey.
Wise later said he had not intended to file a civil case and instead wanted an investigation. He also raised safety concerns, believed the case might be under seal, and appeared to think the case opening meant an investigation was underway. The court explained that it could not act because the case papers had already been received by the District of New Jersey.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated that the action was closed in the Southern District of New York, told Wise to direct further concerns to the District of New Jersey, and directed the clerk not to accept additional filings under the closed case number, except papers for the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Wise v. Police · No. 1:23-cv-09356
- Laura Swain
- Dec. 4, 2023
Background
Randal L. Wise submitted a letter and complaint concerning alleged misconduct by the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey, police, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and an assistant United States attorney. The allegations related to Wise’s pending criminal case in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. On November 2, 2023, the Southern District of New York transferred this action to the District of New Jersey.
After the transfer, Wise wrote that he had not intended to file a civil case. He said he had submitted a formal or ethical complaint seeking an investigation into alleged criminal activity by New Jersey officials. He also expressed safety concerns and asked whether the submitted materials had remained sealed. The opinion states that the action was never sealed in the Southern District of New York.
Jurisdiction after transfer
The court explained that transferring a case removes the transferring court’s authority to act on it. The transferring court retains authority to review the transfer only if the party seeking review asks to pause the transfer before the receiving court’s clerk receives the case papers. Here, Wise filed his motion after the District of New Jersey had received the papers. The Southern District of New York therefore concluded that it had no jurisdiction to consider matters in the transferred case.
The court also explained that its role is to decide disputes between parties impartially, not to investigate alleged wrongdoing at a party’s request. It told Wise to direct his concerns and requests to the District of New Jersey.
Disposition
The court stated that the action was closed in the Southern District of New York. It directed the clerk not to accept further submissions from Wise under the closed case number, except filings directed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion does not identify the specific relief sought in the motion Wise filed after the transfer.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.