Blunt v. City of New York
- Loretta Preska
- 1:14-cv-03949
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Blunt v. City of New York, Judge Preska denied Samuel Blunt’s extension request because his appeal filings were untimely.
Samuel Blunt’s effort to obtain more time to appeal the court’s December 21, 2018 order was denied; the court also denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.
What happened
Blunt v. City of New York began as an action that the court dismissed in 2015. Samuel Blunt appealed, and the Second Circuit affirmed that dismissal in 2016.
In 2018, the court denied Blunt’s request for relief from the judgment and limited future filings in the case. Blunt filed a notice of appeal and requested more time to appeal on November 12, 2019.
The court ruled that the notice and extension request were filed months after the deadlines and denied the request. Judge Loretta A. Preska also ruled that any appeal from this order would not qualify for fee-free status because it would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Blunt v. City of New York · No. 1:14-cv-03949
- Loretta Preska
- May 29, 2020
Background
The court dismissed Samuel Blunt’s action on February 2, 2015. Blunt appealed, and the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal on March 11, 2016. In a December 21, 2018 order, the court treated Blunt’s later submissions as one motion for relief from the judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court denied that motion and directed the Clerk of Court not to accept future filings from Blunt in the action, except documents directed to the Second Circuit.
Appeal deadlines
On November 12, 2019, Blunt filed a notice of appeal and a motion under Rule 4(a)(5) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure for more time to appeal. The court treated the notice as seeking review of the December 21, 2018 order. Under Rule 4(a)(1)(A), the notice of appeal was due within 30 days after entry of the order. Because the order was entered on the docket on December 26, 2018, the notice was due by January 25, 2019. A motion for more time was due by February 25, 2019. Blunt filed both documents on November 12, 2019.
Ruling
The court held that both filings were untimely and denied Blunt’s motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of such an appeal. Judge Loretta A. Preska directed the Clerk of Court to mail Blunt 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.