Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Scott v. Moore, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Gregory Scott's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Scott filed a notice of appeal of a district court order dismissing his complaint without prejudice more than 30 days after the order was entered, missing the deadline for civil appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1). As the time periods for filing notices of appeal are mandatory and jurisdictional, and Scott did not obtain an extension of the appeal period, the Court of Appeals had no authority to consider the merits of the untimely appeal and dismissed the case.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-10-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-6933

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Gregory Scott's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Scott filed a notice of appeal of a district court order dismissing his complaint without prejudice more than 30 days after the order was entered, missing the deadline for civil appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1). As the time periods for filing notices of appeal are mandatory and jurisdictional, and Scott did not obtain an extension of the appeal period, the Court of Appeals had no authority to consider the merits of the untimely appeal and dismissed the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views2 pages

    Scott v. Moore, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Gregory Scott's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Scott filed a notice of appeal of a district court order dismissing his complaint without prejudice more than 30 days after the order was entered, missing the deadline for civil appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1). As the time periods for filing notices of appeal are mandatory and jurisdictional, and Scott did not obtain an extension of the appeal period, the Court of Appeals had no authority to consider the merits of the untimely appeal and dismissed the case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 99-6933

    GREGORY SCOTT,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MICHAEL W. MOORE, Director, SCDC; WILLIAM D.
    CATOE; ROBERT E. WARD, Warden; PHILLIP E.
    MCLEOD, Associate Warden; ROLAND MCFADDEN,
    Associate Warden; JAMES SMITH; JAMES STUCKEY,
    Major; LINDA BOBO; PHOEBE B. JOHNSON, Warden;
    STEPHEN R. CLAYTON; FELICIA OGUNVILIE; JAMES
    R. SEWELL, Major; ANDREW RILEY, Major,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-721-3-6BC)

    Submitted:

    September 30, 1999

    Decided:

    October 8, 1999

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Gregory Scott, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Gregory Scott filed an untimely notice of appeal of the district courts order dismissing his complaint without prejudice. We
    dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

    The time periods for filing no-

    tices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4.


    are "mandatory and jurisdictional."

    These periods

    Browder v. Director, Dep't of

    Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v.


    Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)).

    Parties to civil actions are

    accorded thirty days within which to file in the district court


    notices of appeal from judgments or final orders.
    4(a)(1).

    Fed. R. App. P.

    This appeal period may be extended under Fed. R. App. P.

    4(a)(5) or reopened under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).


    The district court entered its order on April 29, 1999;
    Scott's notice of appeal was improperly filed in the South Carolina
    Court of Appeals on June 30, 1999, which was beyond the thirty-day
    appeal period.

    Scott's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain

    an extension of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of his appeal. We therefore dismiss
    the appeal.

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before


    the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like