Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.
| Decision Date | 21 March 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 13939.,13939. |
| Citation | 276 F.2d 116 |
| Parties | George D. SCHLINK, Appellant, v. CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY CO., Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Robert A. Straub, Detroit, Mich., Robert B. Seeley, Detroit, Mich., of counsel, Jerome Weadock, Saginaw, Mich., on the brief, for appellant.
John Purcell, Saginaw, Mich., Heilman & Purcell, Saginaw, Mich., on the brief, for appellees.
Before McALLISTER, Chief Judge, WEICK, Circuit Judge, and BOYD, District Judge.
Appellee has moved for dismissal of the appeal. Final judgment was entered in the District Court on February 13, 1959. Appellant's motion for a new trial was filed on February 25, 1959 and was overruled on May 12, 1959. Notice of appeal was not filed until June 8, 1959. The motion for a new trial was not timely filed. Rule 59 (b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Accordingly, it did not terminate the running of the thirty day period for appeal, which expired on March 16, 1959. Rule 73(a). This Court has, on may occasions, held the thirty day time limit to be jurisdictional and failure to comply therewith as requiring dismissal of an appeal. Hill v. United States, 6 Cir., 268 F.2d 203; Metalock Repair Service v. Harman, 6 Cir., 234 F.2d 490; Deena Products Co. v. United Brick & Clay Workers of America, 6 Cir., 195 F. 2d 612; Marten v. Hess, 6 Cir., 176 F.2d 834.
Appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal is, therefore, sustained and the appeal is hereby dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Denley v. Shearson/American Exp., Inc.
...434 U.S. 257, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978); Moorer v. Griffin, 575 F.2d 87 (6th Cir.1978); Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., 276 F.2d 116 (6th Cir.1960). Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4) provides that the filing of a timely motion for reconsideration will extend th......
-
Kittery Elec. Light Co. v. Assessors of Town of Kittery
...et al., (U.S.C.C.A., 6th), 195 F.2d 612 (1952), cert. den. 344 U.S. 822, 73 S.Ct. 21, 97 L.Ed. 640; Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co., (U.S.C.C.A., 6th), 276 F.2d 116 (1960); Wagoner et al. v. Fairview Consolidated School District No. 5, et al., (U.S.C.C.A., 10th) 289 F.2d 481 (1961). Fi......
-
Burgers v. Maiben
...An untimely motion for a new trial has no effect on the running of the time for filing a notice of appeal. See Schlink v. C & O Railway Co., 276 F.2d 116 (6th Cir.1960) and Wagoner v. Fairview Consol. School Dist. No. 5, 289 F.2d 480 (10th Cir.1961), both of which interpret Fed.R.Civ.P. 59 ......
-
Thompson v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
...Pictures, 7 Cir., 1950, 181 F.2d 300; Hulson v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 7 Cir., 1961, 289 F.2d 726; Schlink v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., 6 Cir., 1960, 276 F.2d 116. The appellant maintains that a petition for naturalization is "sui generis," (peculiar, and only one of its kind) a......