Hewes v. Alabama Secretary of State
- Lewis Liman
- 1:19-cv-09158
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Hewes v. Alabama Secretary of State, Judge Furman denied requests for an order to show cause, a telephone conference, and appeal fee waiver.
Henry F. Hewes was directly affected because the court denied his requests for an order to show cause, a telephone conference, and permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order also addressed the proposed briefing schedule submitted in the case.
What happened
Henry F. Hewes, representing himself, asked the court to issue an order requiring the defendants to explain why preliminary injunctive relief should not be granted. He also requested a telephone conference and raised a concern about the proposed briefing schedule.
The court denied the request for an order to show cause because Hewes had not shown that he was likely to suffer permanent harm or likely to succeed in the case. The court also denied the telephone-conference request. It said Hewes could file a proper motion for relief if he believed he was entitled to it.
Judge Jesse M. Furman also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Hewes permission to appeal without paying the filing fees. The court explained that the only proposed briefing schedule it had received was the one submitted by the South Carolina Secretary of State.
The detailed version
- Hewes v. Alabama Secretary of State · No. 1:19-cv-09158
- Lewis Liman
- Dec. 3, 2019
Background
Henry F. Hewes, proceeding without a lawyer, sent several letters asking the court to issue an order to show cause concerning preliminary injunctive relief. An order to show cause would require the opposing parties to explain why the requested relief should not be granted. Hewes also requested a telephone conference and expressed concern that he had not received a proposed briefing schedule other than the schedule submitted by the South Carolina Secretary of State.
Rulings
The court denied Hewes's request for an order to show cause. It stated that he had not shown that he was likely to suffer irreparable harm, meaning harm that could not adequately be repaired later, or that he was likely to succeed on the merits. The court said that Hewes could file an appropriate motion if he believed he was entitled to relief.
The court also denied Hewes's request for a telephone conference. It certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees. The court further stated that the proposed schedule submitted at ECF No. 23 was the only proposed schedule it had received. The Clerk was directed to mail Hewes a copy of the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.