Harris v. Walker
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-06563
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Harris v. Walker, Judge Swain accepted Harris’s late application to proceed without paying fees, vacated the earlier denial, reopened the case, and denied that status for an appeal.
William Harris’s case was reopened after the court accepted his late application to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court denied permission to proceed without paying the fee for an appeal from this order.
What happened
In Harris v. Walker, William Harris filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus without a lawyer. The court ordered him to either pay the $5 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without paying the fee.
Harris did neither within the required 30 days, so the court denied his petition without prejudice. The court later received his application to proceed without paying the fee and accepted it because he was representing himself.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the clerk to cancel the earlier denial and judgment and reopen the case for further proceedings. She also ruled that Harris could not proceed without paying the fee for an appeal because an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Harris v. Walker · No. 1:22-cv-06563
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 18, 2022
Background
William Harris brought a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and was proceeding without a lawyer. On August 3, 2022, the court directed him to submit, within 30 days, a completed application to proceed without paying the filing fee or to pay the $5 filing fee. The order stated that failing to comply would result in dismissal of the petition.
Harris did not pay the fee or submit the application within that period. On September 21, 2022, the court therefore denied the petition without prejudice. On September 29, 2022, the court received Harris’s application to proceed without paying the fee.
Ruling
Because Harris was proceeding without a lawyer, the court accepted his late application. The court directed the clerk to vacate, meaning cancel, the September 21 order and judgment and to reopen the case for further proceedings.
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. It therefore denied Harris permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for an appeal. The opinion does not decide the underlying habeas petition.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.