Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 26, 2023

Joseph v. The State of New York

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:23-cv-03515
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Joseph v. The State of New York, Judge Woods granted Alfred Joseph’s motion to extend his appeal deadline and ordered his notice of appeal filed.

Who this affects

Alfred Joseph, whose request for additional time to appeal was granted, and the defendants in the underlying case, including the State of New York.

What happened

In Joseph v. The State of New York, the court had dismissed Alfred Joseph’s complaint and entered judgment. Joseph then asked for more time to file an appeal.

The court found that his request was filed on time and that he had shown good cause because he said circumstances outside his control caused the delay. The court extended his deadline by 10 days and directed the clerk to file his notice of appeal as timely.

Judge Gregory H. Woods also said the notice would be treated as an application to the Court of Appeals for a certificate of appealability because this court had denied one. The court granted the motion and directed the clerk to close it.

The detailed version

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

Case
Joseph v. The State of New York · No. 1:23-cv-03515
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
June 26, 2023

Background

The court stated that it dismissed Alfred Joseph’s complaint on May 17, 2023, and entered judgment on the civil docket. On June 22, 2023, Joseph submitted a motion under Rule 4(a)(5) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure seeking an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. Joseph also filed a document titled “Notice of Appeal.”

Rule and analysis

In a civil case, Rule 4(a)(5) requires a motion for an extension of the appeal deadline to be filed within the rule’s 30-day grace period. The court concluded that Joseph’s motion was timely because it was filed on June 22, 2023, before the July 16, 2023 deadline identified by the court.

The rule also requires a showing of either good cause or excusable neglect. The court explained that good cause applies when circumstances outside the person’s control caused the delay. Joseph stated that he had been subjected to an “illegal lockout; search; seizure; and electrocuted due to retaliation of the Fernandez family.” Accepting his statements as true, the court found that circumstances outside his control caused the delay. The court also noted that the delay was brief.

Ruling

Judge Gregory H. Woods granted Joseph’s motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. The court extended the time by 10 days from June 26, 2023, and directed the clerk to file Joseph’s notice of appeal as timely. Because the court had denied a certificate of appealability, it stated that the notice of appeal would be treated as an application to the Court of Appeals for a certificate of appealability. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 10.

Scope of the decision

This order addressed only the timing and filing of the appeal. It did not explain the basis for the earlier dismissal of Joseph’s complaint or decide the underlying 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.