Vigil v. United States, No. 175-69.

• Decision Date: 27 August 1970
• Docket Number: No. 175-69.
• Citation: 430 F.2d 1357
• Parties: M. T. VIGIL et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The UNITED STATES of America, the Department of Justice, the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Internal Revenue, the Department of Agriculture, the Bureau of Land Management, the Civil Rights Commission, and all Commissioners of all above commissions and all agencies and unknown persons and others, corporations or otherwise having or claiming an interest in this action, Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

430 F.2d 1357 (1970)

M. T. VIGIL et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.The UNITED STATES of America, the Department of Justice, the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Internal Revenue, the Department of Agriculture, the Bureau of Land Management, the Civil Rights Commission, and all Commissioners of all above commissions and all agencies and unknown persons and others, corporations or otherwise having or claiming an interest in this action, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 175-69.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

August 27, 1970.

Charles S. Vigil, Denver, Colo., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Frank B. Friedman, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C. (Shiro Kashiwa, Asst. Atty. Gen., James L. Treece, U. S. Atty., James R. Richards, Asst. U. S. Atty., Denver, Colo., and Raymond N. Zagone, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., were with him on the brief), for defendants-appellees.

Before HICKEY and HOLLOWAY, Circuit Judges, and EUBANKS, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

An order of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, 293 F.Supp. 1176, was entered on December 24, 1968, dismissing plaintiffs-appellants' complaint and action for failure to state a legally sufficient claim.Thereafter, on January 15, 1969, appellants tendered and sought leave to file an amended complaint.The motion to allow the filing was denied by order dated January 31, 1969.

On February 24, 1969, the clerk of the district court received from appellants a notice of appeal stating such appeal to be taken from the order of January 31, 1969.The United States contends the notice of appeal is faulty both as to timeliness and as an attempt to appeal from other than a final judgment.

Since the sixtieth day following December 24, 1968, fell on Saturday, February 22, 1969, we consider the notice of appeal to be timely under Fed.R. App.P. 4(a) and 26(a), if such notice is applicable to the order of dismissal.And although the notice of appeal...