Collins v. Clarke

671 F. App'x 54
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 28, 2016
DocketNo. 16-6835
StatusPublished

This text of 671 F. App'x 54 (Collins v. Clarke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Collins v. Clarke, 671 F. App'x 54 (4th Cir. 2016).

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Shain Claude Collins seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. Collins argued in his notice of appeal, and the record suggests, that he did not timely receive notice of the entry of the district court’s order, and further requested a reopening of the appeal period. See. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6)(A). Because the 30-day appeal period is jurisdictional, Bowles v. Russell, 561 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007), we remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to determine whether to reopen the time to file an appeal, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).

REMANDED

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

Related

Bowles v. Russell
551 U.S. 205 (Supreme Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
671 F. App'x 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collins-v-clarke-ca4-2016.