Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Sherif A. PHILIPS, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE; North Carolina Court System; North Carolina Agency; Vidant Medical Center, f/k/a Pitt County Memorial Hospital; Paul Bolin, M.D.; Ralph Whatley, M.D.; David Creech, Pitt County Memorial Hospital lawyer; Jay Salsman, Pitt County Memorial Hospital lawyer; Debbie Meyer, Law Firm, Cary, NC; Karen Zaner, Law Firm, Dallas, TX; James Crouse, Law Firm, Raleigh, NC; Nardine Guirguis, Law Firm, Raleigh, NC, Defendants-Appellees.
Sherif Philips seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion and his subsequent motion to reopen his case. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007).
The district court's orders denying Philips’ Rule 60(b) motion and motion to reopen were entered on the docket on June 15, 2017, and August 22, 2017, respectively. The notice of appeal was filed on September 26, 2017. Because Philips failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-2186
Decided: February 16, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)