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.
Takaeus Makeon GRAHAM, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Major T. JARRELL, Correctional Officer; Lieutenant D. Anderson, Correctional Officer; R. Tucker, Correctional Officer; A. David Robinson; Carl A. Manis, Warden for Nottoway Correctional Center, Defendants - Appellees.
Takaeus M. Graham seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Parties to a civil action 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). However, the district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal if a party moves for an extension of the appeal period within 30 days after the expiration of the original appeal period and demonstrates excusable neglect or good cause to warrant an extension. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5); see Washington v. Bumgarner, 882 F.2d 899, 900-01 (4th Cir. 1989). “[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 entered its final order on March 11, 2019. Graham filed his notice of appeal with the prison mail system on April 18, 2019, after the expiration of the 30-day appeal period but within the excusable neglect period. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988). Graham also filed documents containing language that we construe as a request for an extension of time to appeal. Accordingly, we remand this case to the district court for the limited purpose of determining whether Graham has demonstrated excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the 30-day appeal period. The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further consideration.
REMANDED
PER CURIAM:
Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Thank you for your feedback!
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. 19-6624
Decided: July 23, 2019
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)