Hellman

Hellman v. Weisberg

Good Law
360 F. App'x 776
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 23, 200908-15059California1,152 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Luz Heilman, a former judicial assistant at the Arizona Court of Appeals, appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to defendants Sheldon Weisberg, former Chief Judge of the Arizona Court of Appeals, and the State of Arizona. Heilman claims that she was retaliated against for participating in the investigation of a discrimination claim made by a former law clerk at the Arizona Court of Appeals. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

As a preliminary matter, we hold that Heilman’s notice of appeal was timely. The district court clerk’s office was closed on the day her notice of appeal was originally due. Thus, the office was “inaccessible” within the meaning of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26(a)(3). See Keyser v. Sacramento City Unified Sch. Dist., 265 F.3d 741, 747 (9th Cir.2001). The availability of electronic filing does not change this result. The inaccessibility clause, as it existed when Heilman’s notice of appeal was filed, was added to Rule 26 in 1989, long , before the advent of electronic filing. See Fed. R.App. P. 26, cmt. (1989). The clause was therefore not intended to distinguish between filings in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.