Federal Rule Of Appellate Procedure 4(A)(2)

28 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Calhoun v. United States
  647 F.2d 6· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-14 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the appeal was timely because the notice of appeal was filed after the announcement of the decision denying the post-judgment motion, even if not formally entered, and that the district court's intent for the order to be final was clear.
• Lewis v. B.F. Goodrich Co.
  850 F.2d 641· 10th Cir.· 1988-07-05 ·cited 40×
  A premature notice of appeal is effective if a subsequent Rule 54(b) certification is obtained or a final adjudication occurs before the court considers the appeal.
• Fassett v. DELTA Kappa Epsilon (NEW York)
  807 F.2d 1150· 3d Cir.· 1986-12-05 ·cited 33×
  The court held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction because the order of dismissal without prejudice was not a final order, as the parties had arranged it to obtain a de facto interlocutory appeal.
• United States v. Hansen
  795 F.2d 35· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-03 ·cited 28×
  A notice of appeal filed before the entry of a final judgment, and before the disposition of pending counterclaims, is ineffective and does not confer appellate jurisdiction.
• In re Smith Corset Shops, Inc.
  696 F.2d 971· 1st Cir.· 1982-12-27 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Brodeurs were not liable for conversion because they acted without notice of the bankruptcy petition and Smith's silence contributed to their ignorance, and that the appellate panel erred in finding conversion based on post-bankruptcy actions not properly
• McCOWAN v. Sears
  908 F.2d 1099· 2d Cir.· 1990-05-25 ·cited 23×
  The court reversed the denial of Dean Witter's motion for a stay pending arbitration, holding that the claims against Dean Witter in McCowan II were referable to arbitration under the parties' agreement. The court also exercised pendent jurisdiction to review Sears' appeal.
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Est. OF Herbert Cammon
  929 F.2d 1220· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-12 ·cited 20×
  A premature notice of appeal does not divest the district court of jurisdiction to enter a final judgment, and a default judgment for failure to comply with discovery orders is permissible when the non-compliance is willful.
• Wielgos v. Commonwealth Edison Co.
  892 F.2d 509· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that forward-looking statements regarding capital expenditures are protected by the Rule 175 safe harbor unless shown to be made without a reasonable basis or in bad faith, and that the probability of an administrative license denial was not material information re
• In re THE Brickyard v. The Walker-Pinkston Cos., Inc.
  735 F.2d 1154· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-22 ·cited 14×
  A notice of appeal filed before a judgment or order is entered, but after it is announced, is valid under Bankruptcy Rule 802, similar to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(2).
• Alcom Elec. Exch., Inc. v. Burgess
  849 F.2d 964· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a premature notice of appeal filed before the entry of final judgment was effective due to binding Fifth Circuit precedent, and that the limitation of liability clause in the advertising contract was enforceable under Mississippi law.
• Davis Harris v. Milwaukee Cnty. Cir. Court & David V. Jennings, Jr.
  886 F.2d 982· 7th Cir.· 1989-10-13 ·cited 10×
  A notice of appeal filed before a post-dated final judgment becomes effective is treated as timely filed.
• Great Am. Ins. Co. v. Rush
  670 F.2d 995· 11th Cir.· 1982-03-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a post-judgment motion served within the time limit and filed within a reasonable time thereafter is considered timely for tolling the appeal period.
• Dort Attwood v. Mendocino Coast Dist. Hosp.
  886 F.2d 241· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-22 ·cited 9×
  When a district court declines to exercise jurisdiction under the Colorado River doctrine due to parallel state litigation, it must stay the federal action rather than dismiss it, to ensure the federal forum remains available if the state proceedings prove inadequate.
• Bordallo v. Reyes
  763 F.2d 1098· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-21 ·cited 9×
  The Guam Visitors Bureau, established as a public corporation under Public Law 17-32, is not an agency or instrumentality of the government, and its structure does not contravene the Organic Act of Guam.
• Marsh-McBIRNEY, Inc. v. Montedoro-Whitney Corp.
  882 F.2d 498· Fed. Cir.· 1989-08-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Montedoro-Whitney's appeals on liability were untimely and dismissed them, affirmed damages and injunction for electromagnetic probe infringement, reversed non-infringement finding for acoustic probes, and remanded for further proceedings on acoustic probes.
• Lewis v. United States Postal Serv.
  840 F.2d 712· 9th Cir.· 1988-02-29 ·cited 7×
  A notice of appeal filed before the disposition of a timely post-judgment motion is ineffective, and a new notice of appeal must be filed after the motion is denied.
• Alerte v. McGINNIS
  898 F.2d 69· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the state's notice of appeal was ineffective because it was filed before the district court formally entered its order denying the state's motion to alter or amend the judgment.
• James F.P. Ross and Janet Yvonne Ross v. Global Marine, Inc.
  859 F.2d 336· 5th Cir.· 1988-10-24 ·cited 4×
  A notice of appeal filed before the disposition of a timely Rule 59 motion is void and confers no appellate jurisdiction.
• Massey-Ferguson Credit Corp. v. Webber
  841 F.2d 1245· 4th Cir.· 1988-03-18 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's grant of new trials in both instances, disagreeing with the majority's decision to reinstate the first jury verdict.
• Wagoner v. Wagoner
  938 F.2d 1120· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-11 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a prematurely filed notice of appeal is a nullity if filed while a tolling motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) is pending.
• Hayes v. United States Postal Serv. & the United States
  859 F.2d 354· 5th Cir.· 1988-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a claim arising from the USPS Employee Suggestion Program, if it constitutes an implied contract, is subject to the Contract Disputes Act and must be brought in the U.S. Court of Claims, not the district court.
• Larez v. City OF LOS Angeles
  946 F.2d 630· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-27 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the denial of a new trial for the six officers but reversed and remanded for a new trial against Chief Gates and the City due to the erroneous admission of hearsay evidence.
• Alden E. Serine v. Oakley Peterson
  989 F.2d 371· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-31
  A notice of appeal filed before a magistrate judge's order is adopted by the district court is premature and ineffective, even if a final judgment is entered later.
• United States v. Royal N. Hardage
  982 F.2d 1491· 10th Cir.· 1993-01-06
  The court held that a district court abused its discretion by enforcing a settlement agreement without an evidentiary hearing when material facts regarding its formation were in dispute, and that a premature notice of appeal can be cured by a belated Rule 54(b) certification obta
• Firstier Mortg. Co. v. Invs. Mortg. Ins. Co.
  930 F.2d 1508· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-23
  The court held that misrepresentations regarding loan-to-value ratio and down payments in mortgage insurance applications voided the policies under Oklahoma law, and affirmed the award of attorney's fees.
• Chanel Allen v. A.J. Horinek and Marjorie Horinek
  827 F.2d 672· 10th Cir.· 1987-08-26
  A notice of appeal filed before the entry of an order denying a motion for a new trial is a nullity and requires a new notice of appeal to be filed after the order's entry.