Cook

Cook v. Culbro Corp.

Good Law
44 F. App'x 762
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 25, 2002No. 01-35070, 02-35090; D.C. No. CV-98-00669-HACalifornia852 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

After a disposable cigarette fighter exploded and blinded her right eye, Delores Cook (“Cook”) filed suit against the manufacturer and distributor of the cigarette fighter, along with the manufacturer of the cigarettes that had been packaged with the fighter. Cook appeals the summary judgment based on Oregon’s two-year statute of limitations. The defendants appeal the district court’s order extending time to file the notice of appeal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm the judgment and order.

I. Notice of Appeal

The defendants contend that Cook filed an untimely notice of appeal because her lawyer incorrectly assumed the day final judgment was entered. They contend that counsel’s mistakes are not sufficient grounds for granting more time to file a notice of appeal.

Because Cook filed her motion after the initial appeal period had expired, she must show “excusable neglect.” Oregon v. Champion Int’l Corp., 680 F.2d 1300 , 1301 (9th Cir.1982). To determine if neglect is excusable, we consider “all relevant circumstances surrounding the party’s omission,” Pioneer Inv. Servs, Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. Partnership, 507 U.S. 380, 395 , 113…

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.