Ruthe Graddy v. Honorable Dudley B. Bonsal, Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Cases that cite this one
14 later published cases cite this decision. The 12 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Johnson v. McMahon (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- Johnson v. Rusin (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- Johnson v. Chumsky (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- Johnson v. Utica National Insurance Group (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- Johnson v. New York State Division of Human Rights (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- Johnson v. Hilton (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- Johnson v. Vera House, Inc. (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- Glover v. HPC - Eight (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2022)
- In re 6 & 40 Investment Group, Inc. (10th Cir. 1985)
- National City Bank v. 6 & 40 Investment Group, Inc. (10th Cir. 1985)
- Stirling v. Chemical Bank (2d Cir. 1975)
- Maryland Tuna Corp. v. MS Benares (2d Cir. 1970)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed by Judge Bonsai in the Southern District of New York for lack of federal jurisdiction on November 29, 1966. Motions for rehearing filed December 2 and 5, 1966 were denied by Judge Bonsai on January 5, 1967. Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal on February 23, 1967. Although the running of the thirty days allowed for filing a notice of appeal was terminated by the filing of the motions for rehearing, regarded as motions “to alter or amend the judgment” under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), Vine v. Beneficial Fin. Co., Inc., 374 F.2d 627 (2 Cir. March 13, 1967); Gainey v. Brotherhood of Ry. & S.S. Clerks, 303 F.2d 716 (3 Cir. 1962); 7 Moore, Federal Practice par. 73.09 [4], at 3185 (2 ed. 1966), more than thirty days elapsed between the denial of the motions on January 5 and the filing of the notice of appeal on February 23. This appeal must therefore be dismissed because the notice of appeal was untimely filed.
If the merits of the appeal were before us, we would affirm, because the absence of federal jurisdiction is clear. Plaintiff has not alleged any diversity of citizenship between herself and any of the defendants. She contends upon appeal that her complaint is based on “violations against the SEC,” but the allegations of her complaint, however broadly read, do not charge any violations of the federal securities laws.
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.