William D. Smith v. United States

779 F.2d 52, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13932, 1985 WL 12791
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedOctober 31, 1985
Docket84-1852
StatusUnpublished

This text of 779 F.2d 52 (William D. Smith v. United States) 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
William D. Smith v. United States, 779 F.2d 52, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13932, 1985 WL 12791 (6th Cir. 1985).

Opinion

779 F.2d 52

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
WILLIAM D. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee.

84-1852

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

10/31/85

APPEAL DISMISSED

E.D.Mich.

ORDER

BEFORE: KEITH, KENNEDY and MILBURN, Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the Court upon consideration of appellant's response to this Court's September 24, 1985 order to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed because of a late filed notice of appeal.

It appears from the record that final judgment was entered on October 3, 1984 and that the notice of appeal filed on Tuesday December 4, 1984, one day late (the 30th day was Sunday December 2, so it was due to be filed by Monday, December 3). Rules 4(a) and 26(a), Federal Rules of Appellate's Procedure. Appellant in his response states that he placed his notice of appeal in the institutional mail system for delivery to the post office, four days before it was due. Mailing of a notice of appeal does not constitute filing. Pryor v. Marshall, 711 F.2d 63 (6th Cir. 1983).

The failure of an appellant to timely file a notice of appeal deprives an appellate court of jurisdiction. Compliance with Rule 4(a) 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) specifically provides that this Court cannot enlarge the time for filing a notice of appeal.

It is ORDERED that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Rule 9(d)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

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 52, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13932, 1985 WL 12791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-d-smith-v-united-states-ca6-1985.