Tiller v. McAllester et al

Filing 70

ORDER denying as moot 66 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis; denying 69 Motion for Extension of Time to File Appeal. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on May 23, 2017. (mll)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION JOSHUA TILLER v. PLAINTIFF Civil No. 4:15-cv-04040 R. WISE, Health Service Administrator, Correct Care Solutions (CCS); DR. McALISTER, CCS; JANET MYERS, Health Service Administrator, CCS; DR. VEIGEAS, CCS; and CONNIE MASON, Health Service Administrator, CCS DEFENDANTS ORDER Plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP)(ECF 66) and a motion for an extension of time to file an appeal (ECF 69). In this case, the judgment Plaintiff seeks to appeal from was entered on March 6, 2017. Plaintiff did not file his notice of appeal (ECF 65) until May 9, 2017; well after the expiration of the thirty day time period to appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). On May 19, 2017, Plaintiff filed an extension of time to file his appeal (ECF 65). However, the Court has no authority to grant the extension since the motion was filed more than thirty days after the expiration of time to appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A). The motion (ECF 69) is therefore DENIED. As the notice of appeal (ECF 65) is untimely, the motion to appeal IFP (ECF 66) is DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED this 23rd day of May 2017. /s/ Barry A. Bryant HON. BARRY A. BRYANT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE -1-

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?