Reynolds v. Hunt Oil Co., 80-5953

Decision Date14 April 1981
Docket NumberNo. 80-5953,80-5953
Citation643 F.2d 1042
PartiesRonald REYNOLDS et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HUNT OIL COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. . Unit B
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

James S. Usich, Miami, Fla., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Benjamin W. Redding, Panama City, Fla., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

Before RONEY, FRANK M. JOHNSON, Jr. and HENDERSON, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

Appellee Hunt Oil Company has filed a motion to dismiss appellants Reynolds' notice of appeal for lack of jurisdiction due to their failure to file their notice in a timely manner.

Rule 4(a), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, requires a notice of appeal to be filed with the clerk of the district court within thirty days of the judgment or order appealed from. Compliance with this requirement is a prerequisite for appellate jurisdiction. See Portis v. Harris County, 632 F.2d 486, 487 (5th Cir. 1980). According to the record, Sunday, November 30, 1980, was the thirtieth day following the entry of judgment. Appellants' notice of appeal was not filed with the clerk of the district court until Tuesday, December 2, 1980. It was untimely, and the time for filing the notice has not been extended.

Rule 4(a) was amended effective August 1, 1979, to provide:

The district court, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause, may extend the time for filing a notice of appeal upon motion filed not later than 30 days after the expiration of the time prescribed by this Rule 4(a).

Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5). In Sanchez v. Board of Regents of Texas Southern University, 625 F.2d 521 (5th Cir. 1980), the Court interpreted that provision to require a motion to extend time to be filed no later than thirty days after expiration of the original appeal time in order for the Court to have jurisdiction over the appeal. See also Meggett v. Wainwright, 642 F.2d 95 (5th Cir. 1981). Due to some confusion over the rule change, the Court made its decision prospective only, applying it to untimely notices of appeal filed thirty days after the date of the decision, August 25, 1980.

Since Reynolds' untimely notice of appeal was filed in December 1980, more than thirty days after August 25, 1980, the holding of Sanchez v. Board of Regents applies. Appellants have never filed a motion to extend the time to file their appeal as required by Rule 4(a). This Court has no authority to extend the time on the ground of excusable neglect. Fed.R.App.P. 26(b).

Appellants assert that their notice of appeal was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Wooden v. Board of Regents University of Georgia System
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • April 19, 2001
    ...notice because "[t]he filing of a timely notice of appeal is essential to give this court jurisdiction"); Reynolds v. Hunt Oil Co., 643 F.2d 1042, 1042 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981) (dismissing appeal and observing that "[c]ompliance with [the 30-day] requirement is a prerequisite for appellate ju......
  • Cordon v. Greiner, 00 Civ. 8927(WK).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • July 29, 2003
    ...420 F.2d 858, 860 (3d Cir.1970)); see also Welsh v. Elevating Boats, Inc., 698 F.2d 230, 232 (5th Cir. 1983); Reynolds v. Hunt Oil Co., 643 F.2d 1042, 1043 (5th Cir.1981); Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Kurtenbach, 525 F.2d 1179, 1181 (8th Cir.1975); M-F-G Corp. v. Emra Corp......
  • Gulliver v. Dalsheim, 1661
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • July 18, 1984
    ...days after its decision. See, e.g., Hensley v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., 651 F.2d 226, 228 (4th Cir.1981); Reynolds v. Hunt Oil Co., 643 F.2d 1042, 1043 (5th Cir.1981); Russo v. Flota Mercante Grancolombiana, 303 F.Supp. 1404, 1406 (S.D.N.Y.1969). But we need not reach this question si......
  • Curacao Drydock Co., (N.Y. Curacaose Dok Maatschappli) v. M/V Akritas
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • July 25, 1983
    ...the expiration of such time; but the court may not enlarge the time for filing a notice of appeal...."); Reynolds v. Hunt Oil Co., 643 F.2d 1042, 1043 (5th Cir.1981) (per curiam) (appellate court has no authority to extend time for filing notice of appeal on ground of excusable neglect).3 G......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT