W.T. PARKER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
C.G. STRICKLAND, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
PER CURIAM:
Final judgment was entered in this case on April 26, 1983. Appellant filed his notice of appeal fifty-seven days later, on June 22.
A notice of appeal is timely if filed within thirty days after the entry of final judgment. Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1). An appellant can obtain an extension of time to appeal, based on excusable neglect, if he files a motion for such extension not later than thirty days after the time allotted for filing notice. Even a pro se appellant must make a specific motion for an extension. Brooks v. Britton, 669 F. 2d 665, 6687 (11th Cir.1982). The approach would be different if this were a criminal case. We would treat the notice of appeal as a motion for extension of time if it were filed within the forty days following the entry of final judgment in the case. United States v. Ward, 696 F. 2d 1315, 1317 (11th Cir.) cert. denied, — U.S. —, 103 S.Ct. 2101, 77 L.Ed.2d 308 (1983). Compare Fed.R.App.P. 4(b) with Fed.R.App.P. 4(a).
The appeal is therefore
DISMISSED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sanders v. United States, 113 F.3d 184 (11th Cir. 1997)….Ct. 2101, 77 L.Ed.2d 308 (1983). We declined to remand in this case, however, because in civil actions, a formal motion for extension of time pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5) must be filed in the district court. See, e.g., Parker v. Strickland, 728 F. 2d 1406, 1407 (11th cir.1984); Brooks v. Britton, 669 F. 2d 665, 666-67 (11th Cir.1982). Thus, we dismissed the appeal rather than remanding it to the district court. The appellant argues in the instant motion that we should allow his appeal to continue p…
-
Castleberry v. Goldome Credit Corp., 408 F.3d 773 (11th Cir. 2005)…ntered.” Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). The time period for filing notice of appeal, however, does not begin to run until entry of a “final judgment.” Leal v. Ga. Dep’t of Corr., 254 F. 3d 1276, 1277 (11th Cir.2001) (per curiam); Parker v. Strickland, 728 F. 2d 1406, 1407 (11th Cir.1984) (per curiam). In a case involving multiple claims, in the absence of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) certification, a district court’s disposition of fewer than all the claims does not constitute an appealable final j…
-
Borio v. Coastal Marine Constr. Co., 881 F.2d 1053 (11th Cir. 1989)…on for leave to file a late appeal after expiration of the thirty day time limit. Because the Borios’ motion was filed beyond the thirty day limit, they must demonstrate that “excusable neglect” justifies their late filing. See Parker v. Strickland, 728 F. 2d 1406, 1407 (11th Cir.1984) (per curiam); 650 Park Ave. Corp. v. McRae, 836 F. 2d 764, 766 (2d Cir.1988); see also Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5) advisory committee’s note.4 Counsel's only explanation for failing to file the appeal within thirty days is that his se…
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Ward, 696 F.2d 1315 (11th Cir. 1983)
- Brooks v. Britton, 669 F.2d 665 (11th Cir. 1982)