Bell v. McAdory

Seventh Circuit

Bell v. McAdory

668 F. App'x 668

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedSeptember 19, 2016

DocketNo. 16-3420

StatusPublished

This text of 668 F. App'x 668 (Bell v. McAdory) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bell v. McAdory, 668 F. App'x 668 (7th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Order

After Timothy Bell had filed a notice of appeal (No. 15-1036), the district court denied a motion to extend the time for appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5). Bell has filed another notice of appeal, directed to that order.

The only appealable order in this case is the district court’s final decision. Procedural matters such as orders under Rule 4(a)(5) are not separately appealable. Instead they are reviewable in the initial appeal. The current appeal therefore is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order

After Timothy Bell had filed a notice of appeal (No. 15-1036), the district court denied a motion to extend the time for appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5). Bell has filed another notice of appeal, directed to that order.

The only appealable order in this case is the district court’s final decision. Procedural matters such as orders under Rule 4(a)(5) are not separately appealable. Instead they are reviewable in the initial appeal. The current appeal therefore is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

668 F. App'x 668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-mcadory-ca7-2016.