Dickerson v. Dickerson
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-09938
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Dickerson v. Dickerson, Judge Swain denied an untimely appeal extension, reconsideration, and permission to appeal without paying fees, leaving the case closed.
David Dwain Dickerson’s requests for more time to appeal, relief from the judgment, and permission to appeal without paying court fees were denied; the action remains closed.
What happened
David Dwain Dickerson sued his sister, Wendy Dickerson, as executor of their mother’s estate. The court had already dismissed the case for lack of authority to hear it, and Dickerson later challenged that decision and sought permission to appeal without paying fees.
The court treated Dickerson’s letter as a request to reopen the judgment and treated his notice of appeal as a request for more time to appeal. It denied the request for more time because it was filed too late, denied the request to reopen or reconsider the judgment, and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.
In Dickerson v. Dickerson, Judge Laura Taylor Swain closed the action and directed the clerk to accept only documents addressed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. She also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, so fee-free appeal status was denied.
The detailed version
- Dickerson v. Dickerson · No. 1:23-cv-09938
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 19, 2024
Background
David Dwain Dickerson filed this action without a lawyer and sought permission to proceed without paying court fees. He sued Wendy Dickerson in her capacity as executrix of their mother’s estate. In an earlier order and judgment, the court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court determined that it lacked legal authority to hear the claims. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
More than two months later, Dickerson filed a letter alleging that the court had acted arbitrarily and with bias because it had not held a hearing or addressed his claims. He later filed a notice of appeal and another application to proceed without paying fees on appeal. The filings initially carried the docket number of a different case and were docketed in this case on April 16, 2024; the court treated them as filed on the dates they were docketed in the other case.
Rulings
The court construed Dickerson’s letter as a motion for relief from the judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It also construed his notice of appeal as a motion for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal.
The court denied the motion for an extension of time as untimely. The dismissal order and civil judgment were entered on January 12, 2024. The court stated that the deadline for a notice of appeal was about February 12, 2024, and that the deadline for seeking an extension was March 13, 2024. Dickerson’s March 27, 2024 letter was filed more than 60 days after entry of judgment. The court held that it could not grant an extension filed after that deadline.
The court denied the Rule 60(b) motion, which the conclusion also describes as a motion for reconsideration. Rule 60(b) permits relief from a judgment for specified reasons such as mistake, newly discovered evidence, misconduct by an opposing party, a void judgment, or other exceptional circumstances. The court found that Dickerson had not shown that any of the first five listed grounds applied. It also found that he had not shown the extraordinary circumstances required for relief under Rule 60(b)(6). The court explained that, without subject-matter jurisdiction, it could not hold a hearing or address the complaint’s merits.
The court denied Dickerson’s renewed application to proceed without paying fees on appeal. It certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore denied fee-free appeal status.
Disposition
The court denied as untimely the motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal, denied the motion for reconsideration, and denied the application to proceed without paying fees on appeal. The action was closed. The clerk was directed to accept only documents directed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.