Urgiles v. Department of Corrections of N.Y. State
- Philip Halpern
- 7:20-cv-04373
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Urgiles v. Department of Corrections, Judge Halpern extended the New York State Attorney General’s deadline to identify a Sergeant and possible John Doe defendants.
The New York State Attorney General, which must respond by December 1, 2020; Felix Urgiles, who was to receive copies of the orders; and the unidentified John Doe defendants whose identities might be clarified.
What happened
In Urgiles v. Department of Corrections of N.Y. State, the court had previously directed the New York State Attorney General to review Felix Urgiles’s letter and determine whether it helped identify a Sergeant and any John Doe defendants.
The Attorney General’s response was originally due November 16, 2020. The court said its earlier order had not been mailed to the Attorney General, so it extended the response deadline to December 1, 2020.
Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the New York State Attorney General to respond by December 1 and directed the Clerk to mail the relevant orders to the parties. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Urgiles v. Department of Corrections of N.Y. State · No. 7:20-cv-04373
- Philip Halpern
- Nov. 17, 2020
Background
On November 2, 2020, the Court directed the New York State Attorney General to review information in Felix Urgiles’s October 19, 2020 letter. The Attorney General was to determine the identity and badge number of the Sergeant described in the letter and advise whether the information could help identify any John Doe defendants.
The Attorney General’s response was due November 16, 2020. The Court stated that a copy of the November 2 order had not been mailed to the Attorney General.
Ruling
Judge Philip M. Halpern extended the deadline for the Attorney General to comply with the November 2 order to December 1, 2020, effective retroactively. The Court directed the Attorney General to respond to Urgiles’s letter by that date.
The Court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk was directed to mail copies of this order and the November 2 order to Urgiles and the New York State Attorney General.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.