Jacqueline Selph v. Council of the City of Los Angeles

Caution
593 F.2d 881·27 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 644·1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 16042
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 22, 197975-2757California1,358 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chambers, J.

The issue before us, and we raise it sua sponte, is whether we have jurisdiction. More specifically, was the district court’s order permitting the filing of an untimely notice of appeal valid?

Under Rule 4(a), F.R.A.P., the notice of appeal in this civil case (not involving the United States or its officers or agencies) was required to be filed within 30 days of the entry of judgment. Judgment was entered on April 30,1975; the notice of appeal was due on or before May 30, 1975. Appellants filed a motion for an extension of time on June 10, 1975, seeking relief under the portion of Rule 4(a) that states:

The motion was filed within the 30-day extension period and was timely. However, the hearing was noticed for July 7, several days after the expiration of the 30-day extension period. The motion was heard on July 7 and the relief granted. The notice of appeal was filed on July 10, 1975, or 71 days after entry of judgment and 11 days after the expiration of the extension period.

The language of the rule is not ambiguous. The notice of appeal should have been filed within 30 days of the entry of judgment or within 60 days of entry of judgment if the court granted an extension of…

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.