Butler v. John/Jane Doe
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-11274
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Butler v. John/Jane Doe, Judge McMahon denied Butler’s motions to extend his appeal deadline and proceed without prepaying appeal fees.
Kenneth Butler’s requests to extend the appeal deadline and proceed without prepaying appeal fees were denied.
What happened
Kenneth Butler, who was incarcerated and representing himself, asked the court to extend the deadline for filing an appeal and to let him appeal without prepaying fees. His complaint had earlier been dismissed without prejudice because he did not submit the required fee-waiver application and prisoner authorization.
The court said Butler’s extension request did not explain why his appeal was late, so he did not show a legally acceptable reason for extending the deadline. The court also found no facts supporting a change to its earlier denial of permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
Judge Colleen McMahon denied both motions. She also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Butler v. John/Jane Doe · No. 1:19-cv-11274
- Colleen McMahon
- May 21, 2020
Background
Kenneth Butler brought this action against John/Jane Doe while incarcerated in Louisiana State Prison in Angola, Louisiana, and proceeded without a lawyer. The court had previously directed Butler either to pay the required filing fees or submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees and a prisoner authorization. Because he did not submit those documents, the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice on February 11, 2020.
Butler later asked for more time to file a notice of appeal and also asked to proceed without prepaying fees on appeal. The court received those motions and his notice of appeal on April 23, 2020.
Extension-of-time request
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4 generally requires a notice of appeal in a civil case to be filed within 30 days after judgment. A district court may extend that deadline when the request is filed within the specified additional period and the person seeking the extension shows excusable neglect or good cause.
The court assumed, for purposes of deciding the motion, that Butler’s documents were filed within the allowable period under the rule treating a prisoner’s filing date as the date he gives documents to prison officials for mailing. But Butler’s motion was unintelligible and did not explain why he failed to file his notice of appeal on time. The court therefore found that he had not shown excusable neglect or good cause and denied the motion for an extension of time to appeal.
Request to proceed without prepaying appeal fees
The court had already denied Butler permission to proceed without prepaying fees on appeal in its February 11 order. The court found that Butler alleged no facts warranting reconsideration of that decision and denied his new fee-waiver motion.
Disposition
The court denied Butler’s motion for an extension of time to appeal and denied his motion to proceed without prepaying fees on appeal. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, so fee-free status was denied for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk was directed to mail Butler a copy of the order and record service on the docket.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.