Rodriguez v. Williams
Jose A. Rodriguez v. Morton Williams; Morton Williams, Owner; Francisco – Last Name Unknown, Security Guard; Unknown Manager on Duty on 4-26-25 at 8PM
- Kimba Wood
- 1:25-cv-03775
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Rodriguez v. Morton Williams: Judge Wood denied as moot an appeal-extension motion because Rodriguez’s notice was timely, and denied appeal fee-waiver status.
Jose A. Rodriguez, who sought more time to appeal and permission to appeal without paying fees; the defendants were not the subjects of the motion addressed in this order.
What happened
In Rodriguez v. Morton Williams, Jose A. Rodriguez, representing himself, asked for more time to file an appeal after the court dismissed his case and entered judgment on September 8, 2025.
The court said a civil appeal generally must be filed within 30 days after judgment. Rodriguez filed his notice of appeal 28 days after judgment, so the notice was timely and he did not need an extension.
Judge Kimba M. Wood denied the extension motion as moot and directed the Clerk to terminate it. Judge Wood also denied Rodriguez permission to proceed without paying appeal fees, finding that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Rodriguez v. Williams · No. 1:25-cv-03775
- Kimba Wood
- Oct. 21, 2025
Background
Jose A. Rodriguez filed the action without a lawyer. The court states that it dismissed the action and that the Clerk of Court entered judgment on September 8, 2025. On October 6, 2025, Rodriguez filed both a motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal and a notice of appeal.
Ruling
The court denied Rodriguez’s motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal as moot. Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A), a notice of appeal in a civil case generally must be filed within 30 days after judgment. Because Rodriguez filed his notice 28 days after the September 8 judgment, the court determined that the notice was timely and that an extension was unnecessary. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion on the docket.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied Rodriguez permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal from this order. The opinion does not explain the basis for the earlier dismissal of the action.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.