Derek Mathias, and Andre Ross Larry Cole, Jr. v. Tommy W. Allen, Jr.

Fourth Circuit

Derek Mathias, and Andre Ross Larry Cole, Jr. v. Tommy W. Allen, Jr.

52 F.3d 321, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17556, 1995 WL 215438

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 12, 1995

Docket95-6131

StatusPublished

This text of 52 F.3d 321 (Derek Mathias, and Andre Ross Larry Cole, Jr. v. Tommy W. Allen, Jr.) 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

Derek Mathias, and Andre Ross Larry Cole, Jr. v. Tommy W. Allen, Jr., 52 F.3d 321, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17556, 1995 WL 215438 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

52 F.3d 321
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Derek MATHIAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
and
Andre ROSS; Larry Cole, Jr., Plaintiffs,
v.
Tommy W. ALLEN, Jr., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-6131.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 15, 1995.
Decided: April 12, 1995.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-212-P)

Derek Mathias, Appellant Pro Se. Grady Michael Barnhill, Womble, Carlyle, SAndridge & Rice, Charlotte, NC, for Appellee.

Before RUSSELL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period established by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to relief under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). The time periods established by Fed. R.App. P. 4 are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore grant Appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely. 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.

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

52 F.3d 321
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Derek MATHIAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
and
Andre ROSS; Larry Cole, Jr., Plaintiffs,
v.
Tommy W. ALLEN, Jr., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-6131.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 15, 1995.
Decided: April 12, 1995.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-212-P)

Derek Mathias, Appellant Pro Se. Grady Michael Barnhill, Womble, Carlyle, SAndridge & Rice, Charlotte, NC, for Appellee.

Before RUSSELL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant noted this appeal outside the thirty-day appeal period established by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1), failed to obtain an extension of the appeal period within the additional thirty-day period provided by Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), and is not entitled to relief under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(6). The time periods established by Fed. R.App. P. 4 are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period deprives this Court of jurisdiction to consider this case. We therefore grant Appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 F.3d 321, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17556, 1995 WL 215438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/derek-mathias-and-andre-ross-larry-cole-jr-v-tommy-ca4-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack