Perez v. State of New York
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-08252
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Perez v. State of New York, Judge McMahon reopened the case, denied the appeal-extension motion as moot, and denied appeal fee-waiver status.
Juana Perez and the reopened civil action. The earlier dismissal and judgment were vacated; the extension request for filing a notice of appeal was denied as moot; and fee-waiver status was denied for an appeal from this order.
What happened
In Perez v. State of New York, the court had dismissed Juana Perez’s complaint without prejudice after she neither applied to proceed without paying filing fees nor paid the required fees.
Perez later asked for more time to file an appeal and asked to proceed without paying fees for the appeal. The court treated that request as also seeking fee-waiver status in the district court.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon ordered the earlier dismissal and judgment vacated and directed that the case be reopened for further proceedings. She denied the request for more time to appeal as moot and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Perez v. State of New York · No. 1:19-cv-08252
- Colleen McMahon
- Apr. 28, 2020
Background
Juana Perez sued the State of New York, Manhattan Port Authority, and Taco Rico of New York. On September 6, 2019, the court directed Perez either to submit an application to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the $400 required to file a civil action. After Perez did neither, the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice on October 11, 2019.
On November 14, 2019, Perez moved for more time to file a notice of appeal and for permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal. The opinion does not describe the claims in the complaint or address their merits.
Rulings
The court treated Perez’s request to proceed without paying fees on appeal as a request for that status in the district court. It directed the Clerk of Court to vacate the October 11, 2019 order and judgment and reopen the case for further proceedings.
The court denied the motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal as moot. 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 denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addressed filing-fee status, vacated an earlier dismissal, reopened the case, and ruled on an appeal-related request without deciding the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.