Jenkins v. Lilley
- Gregory Woods
- 1:23-cv-09613
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jenkins v. Lilley, Judge Woods extended Jenkins’s objection deadline and denied him permission to appeal without paying filing costs.
Terrell Jenkins, who received additional time to object to the report and recommendation but was denied permission to appeal this order without paying filing costs; the respondent may respond to any objections.
What happened
In Jenkins v. Lilley, Terrell Jenkins had until June 2, 2025, to object to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. He requested a 14-day extension on June 1, and the court received that request on June 10.
The court extended the deadline for Jenkins to file written objections to June 16, 2025. The respondent may file a written response within 14 days after any objections. The order warned that failing to object on time would waive the right to object and prevent appellate review.
Judge Gregory H. Woods also ruled that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Jenkins permission to appeal without paying filing costs. The order did not decide the underlying issues in the case.
The detailed version
- Jenkins v. Lilley · No. 1:23-cv-09613
- Gregory Woods
- June 12, 2025
Background
On May 19, 2025, Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger issued a report and recommendation. The order states that Jenkins’s deadline to file objections was June 2, 2025. Jenkins requested a 14-day extension on June 1, and the court received the request on June 10.
Extension of Time
The court extended Jenkins’s deadline to file written objections to the report and recommendation until June 16, 2025. The respondent has 14 days to file a written response to any objections. The order states that objections and responses must be filed with the Clerk of Court and that courtesy copies must be delivered to the chambers of Magistrate Judge Lehrburger and Judge Woods. It also repeats that failing to file timely objections will waive the right to object and prevent appellate review.
Appeal Filing Costs
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied in forma pauperis status—that is, permission to appeal without paying the required filing costs—for purposes of an appeal from this order.
Other Direction and Effect
The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Jenkins a copy of the order by certified mail. This order does not state what the report and recommendation recommended and does not decide the underlying legal issues in the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.