Alfonso Meza, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

Good Law
683 F.2d 314·34 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1053·1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 16890
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 3, 198281-3452, 81-3475California879 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wright, J.

Meza prevailed below in his Title VII retaliation claim against the state Department of Health and Social Services (the state). He received an award of $40,860.43 in damages and $14,000 in attorneys fees.

The court’s final order was entered on May 19. A notice of appeal should have been filed by June 18. Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1). On July 7, the Assistant State Attorney General to whom the case was assigned moved to extend the time for filing the notice. He attached an affidavit, asserting that his failure to file in time resulted from excusable neglect. Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5).

Rule 4(a)(5) permits a court to grant a motion to extend if it was filed within 60 days of judgment. The court may permit filing up to 60 days after judgment or 10 days after its order, whichever is later.

The court granted the state’s motion on July 14, finding excusable neglect, and granted the state 10 days to file. The state complied and filed a notice of appeal on July 24.

Although the notice met the technical requirements of the rule, we must determine whether the reasons given suffice for a finding of excusable neglect. We review the court’s decision for abuse of discretion. National Industries, Inc. v.…

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.