Corey Greene v. Officer Roberson
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999793573-2] Originating case number: 5:12-ct-03178-D Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999919764]. Mailed to: Corey Greene. [16-6351]
Appeal: 16-6351
Doc: 13
Filed: 08/30/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6351
COREY D. GREENE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
OFFICER ROBERSON,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Dever III,
Chief District Judge. (5:12-ct-03178-D)
Submitted:
August 25, 2016
Decided:
August 30, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Corey D. Greene, Appellant Pro Se.
Judith Maria Estevez,
Assistant Attorney General, Joseph Finarelli, Special Deputy
Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6351
Doc: 13
Filed: 08/30/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Corey D. Greene seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
granting Defendant Roberson’s motion for summary judgment and
denying Greene’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion and his Fed. R.
Civ. P. 60(b) motion.
We dismiss in part and affirm in part.
In civil actions in which the United States is not a party,
parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of final judgment
to note an appeal.
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A).
If a party
files a Rule 59 motion to alter or amend the judgment, the time
for filing a notice of appeal starts to run upon the entry of
the
order
disposing
4(a)(4)(A)(iv).
of
the
motion.
Fed.
R.
App.
P.
The timely filing of a notice of appeal, as
established by the provisions of Rule 4(a), is a jurisdictional
requirement.
Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).
Here, the district court entered judgment against Greene on
February
17,
reconsideration
2015,
and
denied
on
August
11,
his
2015.
Rule
59(e)
motion
Accordingly,
for
Greene’s
notice of appeal had to be filed no later than September 10,
2015. 1
Because Greene did not file a notice of appeal within 30
days of the district court’s order, did not seek an extension of
1
Greene’s August 2015 Rule 60(b) motion to vacate does not
affect the calculation of the deadline for his notice of appeal
because it was not filed within 28 days of the entry of the
judgment Greene sought to vacate.
See Fed. R. App. P.
4(a)(4)(A)(vi).
2
Appeal: 16-6351
Doc: 13
Filed: 08/30/2016
Pg: 3 of 3
the appeal period, and could not now move to reopen the time to
file an appeal, 2 this court lacks jurisdiction to consider his
appeal of the district court’s orders granting the motion for
summary
judgment
reconsideration.
and
denying
the
Rule
59(e)
motion
for
Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the
appeal.
Greene did timely appeal the district court’s order denying
his Rule 60(b) motion to vacate.
and find no reversible error.
We have reviewed the record
Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court.
Greene v. Roberson, No.
5:12-ct-03178-D (E.D.N.C. Feb. 23, 2016).
Because no in-court
hearings were held, we deny Greene’s motion for a transcript at
the
government’s
expense.
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 IN PART;
AFFIRMED IN PART
2
The district court lacks authority to grant a motion to
reopen the time to file an appeal if the motion is filed more
than 180 days after the judgment or order is entered.
Fed. R.
App. P. 4(a)(6)(B).
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?