Harris v. Walker
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-06563
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Harris v. Walker, Chief Judge Swain ordered Harris to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepayment.
William Harris must either pay the $5 filing fee or submit a signed application to proceed without prepayment within 30 days. The respondent is not required to answer at this stage.
What happened
In Harris v. Walker, William Harris filed a petition challenging his detention but did not pay the required filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying it.
The court gave Harris 30 days to pay the $5 filing fee or submit a signed application showing that he could proceed without prepayment. The court said no response from the warden was required at this stage.
Chief Judge Swain ordered that the case continue under the court’s procedures if Harris complies, but stated that the action will be dismissed if he does not. The judge also denied payment-free status for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Harris v. Walker · No. 1:22-cv-06563
- Laura Swain
- Aug. 3, 2022
Background
William Harris, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The opinion does not decide the substance of Harris’s petition. Harris submitted the petition without the required $5 filing fee and without an application to proceed without prepaying court fees.
Order
The court ordered Harris, within 30 days of the order, to either pay the $5 filing fee or complete and submit the attached application to proceed without prepayment. The application was to identify docket number 22-CV-6563 (LTS). If the court grants the application, Harris may proceed without prepaying fees.
The court stated that no answer from the respondent was required at that time. If Harris complies, the case will be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures. If he does not comply within the allowed time, the action will be dismissed.
Appeal-related ruling
Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied payment-free status for purposes of an appeal. This order did not decide whether Harris is entitled to habeas relief.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.