Taylor v. Easley Police Dept
Taylor v. Easley Police Dept
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6119
JAMES ALLEN TAYLOR,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
EASLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-94-1784-3-6BC)
Submitted: October 8, 1996 Decided: October 23, 1996
Before HAMILTON, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Allen Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. James Victor McDade, DOYLE & O'ROURKE, Anderson, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss the
appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdiction-
al." 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 have thirty days within which to
file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or
final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time to ap-
peal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period
under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). Appellant's failure to file a timely notice of appeal* or to obtain either an extension or a reopening of the appeal period
leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's 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
* For the purposes of this appeal we assume that the date Ap- pellant wrote on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it would have been submitted to prison authorities. See Houston v. Lack,
487 U.S. 266(1988).
2 3
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished