Hector Emilio Reyes-Cardona v. J. C. Penney Co., Inc.

First Circuit

Hector Emilio Reyes-Cardona v. J. C. Penney Co., Inc.

690 F.2d 1, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19775

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedApril 26, 1982

Docket82-1231

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 690 F.2d 1 (Hector Emilio Reyes-Cardona v. J. C. Penney Co., Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hector Emilio Reyes-Cardona v. J. C. Penney Co., Inc., 690 F.2d 1, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19775 (1st Cir. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal on the theory that the notice of appeal was late, the time for filing such notice allegedly not having been extended by a Rule 59(e) motion filed in this case since, it is alleged, the Rule 59(e) motion was itself untimely. Rule 4(a)(4) F.R.A.P.

The day appellee alleges was the last day for filing the Rule 59(e) motion was Monday, January 11. But that day was a legal holiday in Puerto Rico honoring Eugenio Maria de Hostos. See 1 L.P.R.A. § 75. As such it is not counted in the computation of time. Rule 6(a) F.R.Civ.P.; Ohio Inns, Inc. v. Nye, 542 F.2d 673 (6th Cir. 1976).. The fact that the district court clerk’s office was open for business on that day is irrelevant. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co. v. Gridiron Steel Co., 382 U.S. 32, 86 S.Ct. 152, 15 L.Ed.2d 26 (1965).

The motion to dismiss is denied.

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

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal on the theory that the notice of appeal was late, the time for filing such notice allegedly not having been extended by a Rule 59(e) motion filed in this case since, it is alleged, the Rule 59(e) motion was itself untimely. Rule 4(a)(4) F.R.A.P.

The day appellee alleges was the last day for filing the Rule 59(e) motion was Monday, January 11. But that day was a legal holiday in Puerto Rico honoring Eugenio Maria de Hostos. See 1 L.P.R.A. § 75. As such it is not counted in the computation of time. Rule 6(a) F.R.Civ.P.; Ohio Inns, Inc. v. Nye, 542 F.2d 673 (6th Cir. 1976).. The fact that the district court clerk’s office was open for business on that day is irrelevant. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co. v. Gridiron Steel Co., 382 U.S. 32, 86 S.Ct. 152, 15 L.Ed.2d 26 (1965).

The motion to dismiss is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

690 F.2d 1, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19775, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hector-emilio-reyes-cardona-v-j-c-penney-co-inc-ca1-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack