| Rent Wars (Rentwars) | Monday, May 20, 2002 - 04:30 am
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York covers Manhattan, Bronx, White Plains, Westchester, etc. It is one of the largest districts (in terms of judicial staffing) in the U.S. It shares much of its local rules with the EDNY.
Clerks
In the SDNY pro se litigants are segregated from attorneys. Separate, and not equal. Regular clerks are on the first floor and are efficient and competent. The pro se clerks are on the second floor and are hostile, lazy, and slow, and that's only if you can find them.
Many years ago (early 90's) I referred to the SDNY pro se clerks as the super-clerks. There were many of them, and they moved fast. While they were in the same building as the Second Circuit, they acted more professionally. But now they are in a separate building and they don't have to worry about Circuit staff observing abuse of pro se litigants. In recent times, the SDNY's pro se office could be called the "Clerks from Hell." They delight in harassing and taunting pro se litigants. One even boasted that the SDNY took over 6 months to decide a simple pro se IFP motion. In the EDNY it would be abnormal for it to take more than a day or so. "If you don't like it go to the Eastern District", one clerk is reported to say to litigants. For attorneys in the SDNY, IFP motions are prospectively granted (i.e. granted without a judge having to see the motion). It is also routine for the SDNY pro se clerks to reject papers without a valid reason, and to make up "rules du jour" to block pro se litigants from their rights to due process. Additional harassment is experienced by minority pro se litigants at the hands of SDNY pro se clerks (some of whom are also minorities).
The pro se attorneys are not much better, and in one case far worse. That one appears to delight in calling court security to escort minorities out of the building on the slightest pretexts (usually while a senior pro se attorney is not around). An example of one such pretext is when a pro se party asks him to identify the rule upon which he is basing his rejection of papers. Particularly since the clear federal policy is to accept papers for filing regardless of form. Even showing him that the same papers were filed in the same way in the same case a few weeks earlier is a pretext for him to call security on minority litigants. In some cases he has security escort out multiple unrelated minority litigants in rapid succession.
Far worse than a single racist court attorney is that the court administration ignores complaints against him and tacitly approves of the selective harassment of minority litigants.
The pro se attorneys don't seem to have any understanding of procedural rules or standing orders. Why bother learning the actual rules when you can just make them up as you go? At least one senior pro se attorney/ supervisor has knowledge of the rules, but she's elusive and doesn't monitor her young, incompetent staffers.
Rating: 2
Court
The SDNY has many standing orders and policies that are openly hostile to pro se litigants. It is very common for the SDNY to summarily transfer venue against pro se litigants, cheating them of their forum choice without a hearing or a chance to be heard. This also dumps a flood of pro se cases on the far less numerous judges of the EDNY and strains the far smaller facilities of that court. At various times the pro se clerks prominently display at their counter, like trophies, standing orders banning this or that litigant from filing in the court. Fortunately for democracy, the Second Circuit has been observed slapping down one of these ill-conceived, overreaching Soviet style standing orders.
Although it had a history of excellence in the early 90s, in its treatment of pro se litigants the SDNY has become petty, mean spirited, and unprofessional.
Rating: 3
Facilities
The SDNY has deposition rooms available for pro se litigants. This is a major advantage. It is very difficult for the average pro se to find a suitable location to depose witnesses. The court provides the taping service and bypasses a host of problems with pro se depositions. While that is nice, a more basic service is basically denied pro se litigants. The ability to look up a docket sheet or other case is near impossible in the SDNY. A hoard of service paralegals hog the terminals for hours on end. Half the time they aren't even using the machines. Even if you find a free machine, chances are that it's broken. The court should make certain that the machines remain available to the public.
Rating: 6
Judges
Rent Wars does not monitor federal judges due to the complexity and variety of legal issues that these judges handle. We do occasionally observe the federal courts in operation and in extreme cases criticize particular rulings or actions.
Total rating: 4 |