Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 7, 2023

Jones v. City of New York

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-07243
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jones v. City of New York, Judge Swain denied an unnecessary appeal-extension request and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Keisha Jones, whose request for additional time to appeal was denied as unnecessary and whose fee-free status for the appeal was denied.

What happened

In Jones v. City of New York, the court had previously dismissed Keisha Jones’s case for failing to state a claim, and judgment was entered on February 9, 2023. Jones filed a notice of appeal and asked for more time to appeal.

The court denied the request for more time because Jones filed her notice of appeal within the required 30-day period. The court also ruled that Jones could not appeal without paying the required fees because any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain therefore denied the extension request as unnecessary and denied fee-free status for the appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones v. City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-07243
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Mar. 7, 2023

Background

The court had dismissed the action on February 6, 2023, for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. Judgment was entered on February 9, 2023. On March 6, 2023, Keisha Jones filed a notice of appeal and a motion asking for an extension of time to file that notice.

Ruling on the Extension Request

The court denied the motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. Under the cited appellate rule, a litigant generally has 30 days after entry of the challenged order or judgment to file a notice of appeal. Because the judgment was entered on February 9 and the court received Jones’s notice on March 6, the notice was timely. The court therefore denied the extension request as unnecessary.

Appeal Without Paying Fees

The court 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 Jones’s fee-free status for purposes of the appeal. This order did not revisit the earlier dismissal of the action.

Disposition

The court denied the motion for an extension of time to appeal and denied fee-free status for the appeal.

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.