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.
Shahid L. A. MAJID, a/k/a Arthur Moseley, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. RN RICHARDS, in individual capacity; RN Belser, in individual capacity; Ms. Barbara, Kitchen Supervisor, in individual capacity; Cpt. Carter, in individual capacity; Karol Berry, Health Services Headquarters, in individual capacity; Mr. Woodham, Kitchen Supervisor, in individual capacity; Sgt. Summers, in individual capacity; SCDC; RN Ms. Heather Varnadore; Lt. C. Parker, in individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Shahid L.A. Majid seeks to appeal the district court's amended order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissing Majid's civil action, as well as denying his requests for injunctive relief. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
In civil cases, parties have 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 entered judgment on October 20, 2020. Shahid filed the notice of appeal on November 25, 2020.* Because Shahid failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant Defendants’ motions to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date designated by Majid in his certificate of service is the earliest date Majid could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. 20-7884
Decided: June 28, 2021
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)