Davalloo v. Kaplan
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:16-cv-09342
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Davalloo v. Kaplan, Judge Briccetti amended an earlier order, declined to issue an appeal certificate, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Sheila Davalloo, whose request for a certificate of appealability was denied and whose fee-free status for an appeal was denied.
What happened
Davalloo v. Kaplan concerns an amendment to the court’s October 18, 2019, order. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute or explain what the earlier order decided.
The court said Sheila Davalloo had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, so it would not issue a certificate of appealability. It also denied her permission to appeal without paying court fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti ordered the clerk to mail the amendment to Davalloo at the address listed on the docket.
The detailed version
- Davalloo v. Kaplan · No. 7:16-cv-09342
- Vincent Briccetti
- Jan. 7, 2020
What the order does
The court amended its October 18, 2019, memorandum opinion and order. The amendment addressed the conditions for appealing that earlier order. The opinion does not state the underlying claims, the result of the October 18 order, or the basis of the original petition.
Certificate of appealability
The court stated that Sheila Davalloo had not made a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” It therefore ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue. A certificate of appealability is a court document required for certain appeals in this type of federal case. The court cited 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) and a Second Circuit decision.
Permission to appeal without paying fees
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. Based on that certification, it denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Coppedge v. United States.
Other direction and disposition
The clerk was instructed to mail a copy of the order to Davalloo at the address on the docket. The order does not state that the underlying case was dismissed or otherwise describe a final disposition of the underlying petition.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.