Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 22, 2021

Johnson v. Court of Appeals

Judge
Louis Stanton
Docket
1:20-cv-05480
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Johnson v. Court of Appeals, Judge Stanton ruled that Johnson’s notice of appeal was premature and gave him 30 days to amend his complaint.

Who this affects

Jerry L. Johnson, the Court of Appeals and the other defendants, and the district court’s handling of the premature appeal.

What happened

In Johnson v. Court of Appeals, Jerry L. Johnson had been given permission to file a second amended complaint after the court dismissed his amended complaint. He filed a notice of appeal before submitting the second amended complaint.

The court ruled that the notice of appeal was premature because the court had issued only nonfinal orders that were not approved for immediate appeal. The notice therefore did not remove the case from the district court’s authority.

Judge Louis L. Stanton gave Johnson 30 days to submit a second amended complaint. If Johnson does not do so and cannot show good cause, the court will enter judgment and dismiss the matter under the reasons stated in the earlier dismissal order; the appeal will then proceed.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Johnson v. Court of Appeals · No. 1:20-cv-05480
Judge
Louis Stanton
Date
Jan. 22, 2021

Background

The court had previously directed Jerry L. Johnson to amend his complaint to address deficiencies in the original pleading. After Johnson filed an amended complaint, the court dismissed it on December 15, 2020, but gave him 30 days to file a second amended complaint with additional facts that could support a viable claim. The court’s earlier order stated that failure to comply would result in entry of judgment.

Johnson signed and filed a notice of appeal on January 1, 2021. The order explains that, under the prison mailbox rule, the date a plaintiff signs a court submission qualifies as the filing date. The opinion does not otherwise state Johnson’s representation status.

Court’s Analysis

The court determined that the notice of appeal was premature. At that point, the district court had issued only nonfinal orders, and none had been certified for an immediate appeal before final judgment. Because the notice challenged a nonfinal, uncertified order, it was ineffective and did not remove the district court’s authority over the case.

Disposition

The court granted Johnson 30 days from the date of the order to file a second amended complaint if he wished to do so. If he failed to file one within that period and could not show good cause for the failure, the court stated that it would enter judgment and dismiss the matter for the reasons given in the December 15, 2020 order. The court also stated that the appeal would proceed. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to the plaintiffs and record service on the docket. Judge Louis L. Stanton signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.