Horace Alfred Jordan v. John B. Taylor Edward W. Murray Commonwealth of Virginia

25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20927, 1994 WL 251907
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 10, 1994
Docket91-7066
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.3d 1039 (Horace Alfred Jordan v. John B. Taylor Edward W. Murray Commonwealth of Virginia) 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
Horace Alfred Jordan v. John B. Taylor Edward W. Murray Commonwealth of Virginia, 25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20927, 1994 WL 251907 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

25 F.3d 1039
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Horace Alfred JORDAN, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
John B. TAYLOR; Edward W. Murray; Commonwealth of
Virginia, Defendants Appellees.

No. 91-7066.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 29, 1994.
Decided June 10, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-90-597-R)

Horace Alfred Jordan, appellant pro se.

Mark Ralph Davis, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, VA, for appellees.

W.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before LUTTIG and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, 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 dismiss the appeal. 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.

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

Related

United States v. Robinson
361 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 1960)
Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.
434 U.S. 257 (Supreme Court, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20927, 1994 WL 251907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/horace-alfred-jordan-v-john-b-taylor-edward-w-murr-ca4-1994.