Satchell v. Dept. of Corrections
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-01763
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Satchell v. Dept. of Correction, Judge Swain denied an unnecessary appeal extension and denied John Satchell’s request to proceed without fees.
John Satchell and the defendants in the action; the order specifically concerns Satchell’s appeal and requests to proceed without paying fees.
What happened
In Satchell v. Dept. of Correction, John Satchell asked for more time to appeal and sought permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The court found that his notice of appeal was timely because it was signed within 30 days after judgment.
The court denied the extension request as unnecessary. It also denied Satchell’s request to proceed without fees on appeal because the court had already ruled on his fee status, while stating that he could seek that permission after the appeal was transferred to the Court of Appeals.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk to process the appeal and certified that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, so fee-free status was denied for an appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Satchell v. Dept. of Corrections · No. 1:24-cv-01763
- Laura Swain
- June 13, 2025
Background
John Satchell, who is incarcerated, filed the action without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. The court had dismissed the action without prejudice on April 22, 2025, and had denied fee-free status for any appeal. Satchell then submitted a motion for more time to file a notice of appeal, a notice of appeal, and a request to proceed without paying fees on appeal.
Rulings
The court denied the motion for more time as unnecessary. The applicable appellate rule requires a notice of appeal in a civil case to be filed within 30 days after judgment. Because the judgment was entered on April 22, 2025, and Satchell’s notice was signed on May 13, 2025, the court concluded that the appeal was timely.
The court also denied Satchell’s request to proceed without paying fees on appeal because it had already ruled on his fee status. The court stated that Satchell could seek permission to proceed without paying fees after the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals.
Disposition
The court directed the Clerk to terminate the motion for an extension and to process the appeal. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.