United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. Spree, Inc. Supershirts, Inc. Top Lease, Inc. Lawrence Kleiman and Neil Kleiman

779 F.2d 53, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13999, 1985 WL 13860
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedOctober 9, 1985
Docket85-1357
StatusUnpublished

This text of 779 F.2d 53 (United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. Spree, Inc. Supershirts, Inc. Top Lease, Inc. Lawrence Kleiman and Neil Kleiman) 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
United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. Spree, Inc. Supershirts, Inc. Top Lease, Inc. Lawrence Kleiman and Neil Kleiman, 779 F.2d 53, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13999, 1985 WL 13860 (6th Cir. 1985).

Opinion

779 F.2d 53

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
UNITED FEATURE SYNDICATE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
SPREE, INC.; SUPERSHIRTS, INC.; TOP LEASE, INC.; LAWRENCE
KLEIMAN; AND NEIL KLEIMAN, Defendants-Appellants.

85-1357

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

10/9/85

APPEAL DISMISSED

E.D.Mich., 600 F.Supp. 1242

ORDER

BEFORE: MERRITT, JONES, and CONTIE, Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the Court upon consideration of the appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The appellants have failed to respond thereto.

It appears from the record that the judgment was entered December 28, 1984. A motion for modification of judgment was served and filed on January 9, 1985. This untimely served Rule 59, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, motion failed to toll the appeals period. Rule 4(a)(4), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. The motion was denied by order entered April 17, 1985. The April 26, 1985, notice of appeal was taken from the December 28, 1984, judgment and April 17, 1985, order denying motion for new trial and modification of judgment.

This Court lacks jurisdiction in this appeal. An order denying a Rule 59, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, motion is not a final judgment or appealable order. Carpenter v. Klosters Rederi, 604 F.2d 11 (5th Cir. 1979). The notice of appeal as it applies to the judgment was 88 days late. Rules 4(a) and 26(a), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The failure of an appellant to timely file a notice of appeal deprives an appellate court of jurisdiction. Compliance with Rule 4(a), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, is a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite which this Court can neither waive nor extend. Peake v. First Nat. Bank and Trust Co. of Marquette, 717 F.2d 1016 (6th Cir. 1983). Rule 26(b), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, specifically provides that this Court cannot enlarge the time for filing a notice of appeal.

It is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal be and hereby is dismissed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
779 F.2d 53, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13999, 1985 WL 13860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-feature-syndicate-inc-v-spree-inc-supershir-ca6-1985.