Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 23, 2021

Fredricks v. Mills

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:21-cv-04996
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Fredricks v. Mills, Judge Swain administratively closed a mistakenly opened case and directed its petition be filed as an amendment in an earlier case.

Who this affects

Nigel Fredricks and the administration of his habeas petition; the petition was moved into the earlier action, No. 21-CV-3690, while No. 21-CV-4996 was administratively closed.

What happened

In Fredricks v. Mills, Nigel Fredricks filed a petition challenging what he described as an assault case. The court had first opened the matter under docket number 21-CV-3690 and allowed him to submit an amended petition.

Fredricks then filed the amended petition, but the Clerk’s Office mistakenly opened it as a new case under docket number 21-CV-4996. Fredricks told the court that he intended the filing to be an amendment in the earlier case, not a new lawsuit.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk to administratively close case 21-CV-4996 and file its petition as an amended petition in case 21-CV-3690. She also directed the Clerk to mail the order to Fredricks and denied fee-free appeal status because any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Fredricks v. Mills · No. 1:21-cv-04996
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 23, 2021

Background

Nigel Fredricks filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging what he called “an assault case.” The Clerk opened his original petition as civil action No. 21-CV-3690. On May 17, 2021, the court gave Fredricks 30 days to file an amended petition.

Fredricks filed a petition labeled with the earlier docket number on June 4, 2021. The Clerk instead opened that filing as a new civil action, No. 21-CV-4996. The court later received Fredricks’s letter explaining that he did not intend to begin a new action and wanted the filing treated as an amended pleading in No. 21-CV-3690.

Court’s action

The court directed the Clerk to administratively close No. 21-CV-4996; file the petition docketed as ECF No. 1 in that case as an amended petition in No. 21-CV-3690; and file a copy of the order in the earlier action. Fredricks was directed to put docket number 21-CV-3690 on future papers supporting his petition.

The court also directed the Clerk to mail Fredricks a copy of the order and note service on the docket. It certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied fee-free appeal status for that appeal. The order did not decide the underlying habeas petition’s claims.

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.