Thomas v. Royce
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-06781-MKV
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Thomas v. Royce, Judge McMahon ruled that the pending appeal barred review of Thomas’s response and denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.
Warren Thomas, because the district court did not consider his response while the appeal was pending and denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.
What happened
In Thomas v. Royce, Warren Thomas’s petition was initially denied after he did not respond to an order asking why it should not be rejected as late. The court later reopened the case after receiving Thomas’s explanation that he could not respond on time.
Thomas then filed a notice of appeal and asked for more time to appeal. The court granted that request and sent the appeal to the Court of Appeals before receiving Thomas’s response to the earlier order.
Because the appeal transferred authority over the case to the Court of Appeals, Judge Colleen McMahon ruled that the district court could not consider Thomas’s response until the appeal ended. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Thomas v. Royce · No. 1:19-cv-06781-MKV
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 29, 2020
Background
Warren Thomas filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On August 28, 2019, the court ordered him to explain why the petition should not be denied as time-barred. After Thomas did not respond, the court denied the petition. The court later reopened the action after receiving a letter from Thomas explaining that he had been unable to respond on time.
The Clerk mailed the reopening order on November 27,
- Thomas prepared a notice of appeal and a motion for more time to appeal on December 2,
- The court granted the motion, and the Clerk sent the appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on December 18,
- The district court then received Thomas’s response to the August 28 order on January 27, 2020.
Ruling
Judge Colleen McMahon ruled that the district court no longer had authority over the parts of the case involved in the appeal. The court therefore could not consider Thomas’s response until the appeal proceedings were closed. The order directed the Clerk to mail the order to Thomas, note service on the docket, and send a copy to the Second Circuit’s Clerk. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for that appeal.
Effect of the Order
This order did not decide whether Thomas’s petition was time-barred or otherwise resolve the petition’s underlying claims. It addressed only the district court’s authority to consider his response while the appeal was pending.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.