George D. Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.

Sixth Circuit

George D. Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.

276 F.2d 116, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 5094

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMarch 21, 1960

Docket13939_1

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 276 F.2d 116 (George D. Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

George D. Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., 276 F.2d 116, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 5094 (6th Cir. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellee has moved for dismissal of the appeal. Final judgment was entered in the District Court on February 13, 1959. Appellant’s motion for a new trial was filed on February 25, 1959 and was overruled on May 12, 1959. Notice of appeal was not filed until June 8, 1959. The motion for a new trial was not timely filed. Rule 59 (b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Accordingly, it did not terminate the running of the thirty day period for appeal, which expired on March 16, 1959. Rule 73(a). This Court has, on may occasions, held the thirty day time limit to be jurisdictional and failure to comply therewith as requiring dismissal of an appeal. Hill v. United States, 6 Cir., 268 F.2d 203; Metalock Repair Service v. Harman, 6 Cir., 234 F.2d 490; Deena Products Co. v. United Brick & Clay Workers of America, 6 Cir., 195 F.2d 612; Marten v. Hess, 6 Cir., 176 F.2d 834.

Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal is, therefore, sustained and the appeal is hereby dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellee has moved for dismissal of the appeal. Final judgment was entered in the District Court on February 13, 1959. Appellant’s motion for a new trial was filed on February 25, 1959 and was overruled on May 12, 1959. Notice of appeal was not filed until June 8, 1959. The motion for a new trial was not timely filed. Rule 59 (b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Accordingly, it did not terminate the running of the thirty day period for appeal, which expired on March 16, 1959. Rule 73(a). This Court has, on may occasions, held the thirty day time limit to be jurisdictional and failure to comply therewith as requiring dismissal of an appeal. Hill v. United States, 6 Cir., 268 F.2d 203; Metalock Repair Service v. Harman, 6 Cir., 234 F.2d 490; Deena Products Co. v. United Brick & Clay Workers of America, 6 Cir., 195 F.2d 612; Marten v. Hess, 6 Cir., 176 F.2d 834.

Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal is, therefore, sustained and the appeal is hereby dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 F.2d 116, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 5094, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-d-schlink-v-chesapeake-ohio-railway-co-ca6-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack