Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 21, 2023

Watson v. Miller

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:23-cv-08356
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
HabeasPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Watson v. Miller, Judge Swain ordered Shalik Watson to pay the filing fee or submit an IFP application within 30 days.

Who this affects

Shalik Watson must either pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit the required application within 30 days to avoid dismissal of the action; the order does not resolve the habeas petition’s merits.

What happened

In Watson v. Miller, Shalik Watson filed a petition asking for habeas relief but did not pay the $5 filing fee or submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees. The opinion states that Watson was representing himself.

The court ordered Watson, within 30 days, either to pay the filing fee or complete and submit the attached application. No summons would be issued at that time, and the case would be processed if Watson complied.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated that the action would be dismissed if Watson did not comply within the deadline. She also denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Watson v. Miller · No. 1:23-cv-08356
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Sept. 21, 2023

Background

Shalik Watson, who was proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition was submitted without the $5.00 filing fee and without an application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an IFP application.

Order

The court ordered Watson to do one of two things within 30 days of the order: pay the $5.00 filing fee or complete and submit the attached IFP application. The application was to include docket number 23-CV-8356 (LTS). The court explained that, if it granted the application, Watson could proceed without paying the fees in advance.

The court directed that no summons be issued at that time. It stated that the case would be processed under the Clerk’s Office procedures if Watson complied with the order, but that the action would be dismissed if Watson failed to comply within the allowed time.

Appeal and disposition

The court certified under federal law that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied IFP status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the substance of Watson’s habeas petition.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.