John Laschkewitsch v. Lincoln Life and Annuity

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motions disposition in opinion--denying motions as moot. Originating case number: 5:13-cv-00315-BO. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999665329]. Mailed to: John Laschkewitsch. [15-1178]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-1178 Doc: 43 Filed: 09/23/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1178 JOHN B. LASCHKEWITSCH, as Administrator for the Estate of Ben Laschkewitsch, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LINCOLN LIFE AND ANNUITY DISTRIBUTORS, INC., d/b/a Lincoln Financial Group, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:13-cv-00315-BO) Submitted: September 17, 2015 Decided: September 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John B. Laschkewitsch, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Nis Leerberg, SMITH MOORE LEATHERWOOD LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; Robert R. Marcus, SMITH MOORE LEATHERWOOD LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-1178 Doc: 43 Filed: 09/23/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: John B. Laschkewitsch seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment in Defendant’s favor. 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). in the district court any of the If a party files motions listed in Rule 4(a)(4)(A), the 30-day appeal period runs from the entry of the order disposing 4(a)(4)(A). of the last such motion. Fed. R. App. P. “[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 (2007). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on September 16, 2014. Laschkewitsch timely filed a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to amend the judgment, which the district court denied on January 15, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed thirty-five February days later, on 19, 2015. Because Laschkewitsch failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain dismiss an extension the appeal. or We reopening deny as 2 of the moot appeal the period, parties’ we pending Appeal: 15-1178 Doc: 43 motions. legal before Filed: 09/23/2015 Pg: 3 of 3 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. DISMISSED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?