Harris v. Sony Entertainment
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-06833
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Harris v. Sony Entertainment, Judge McMahon granted Harris more time to appeal but denied fee-free appeal status.
LaToya J. Harris received an extension of time to appeal the earlier dismissal, but fee-free status for the appeal was denied. The order did not alter the prior judgment involving Sony Entertainment and the other defendants.
What happened
In Harris v. Sony Entertainment, the court had previously dismissed the action and entered judgment. Harris then filed a notice of appeal and asked for more time to appeal.
The court granted Harris’s motion for an extension of time to appeal. It found good cause based on Harris’s statement that she was not prepared within the original deadline.
Judge Colleen McMahon also certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status for the appeal. The order did not change the earlier dismissal.
The detailed version
- Harris v. Sony Entertainment · No. 1:20-cv-06833
- Colleen McMahon
- Nov. 5, 2020
Background
By an order dated September 17, 2020, the court dismissed the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), and it entered judgment on September 21, 2020. On November 2, 2020, the court received Harris’s notice of appeal and her motion for an extension of time to appeal the dismissal order.
Reasoning
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A) generally requires a notice of appeal in a civil case to be filed within 30 days after judgment is entered. Rule 4(a)(5)(A) permits the district court to extend that deadline when the motion is filed within the specified period and the party shows excusable neglect or good cause. Harris stated that she sought an extension because she “wasn’t prepared within the time allowed.” The court found good cause shown.
Ruling
The court granted Harris’s motion for an extension of time to appeal. The clerk was directed to mail her a copy of the order and record service on the docket. 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 the appeal. This order addressed the appeal deadline and appeal-fee status; it did not reopen or alter the earlier dismissal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.