McKinney v. Greenville Cnty Sch ( 1998 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 98-1337
    SHIRLEY S. MCKINNEY,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    GREENVILLE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
    Judge. (CA-96-2202-6-20AK)
    Submitted:   May 28, 1998                  Decided:   June 10, 1998
    Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Shirley S. McKinney, Appellant Pro Se. Edwin Brown Parkinson, Jr.,
    Hamlet Sam Mabry III, HAYNSWORTH, MARION, MCKAY & GUERARD, Green-
    ville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Shirley S. McKinney filed an untimely notice of appeal. We
    dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing
    notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods
    are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of
    Corrections, 
    434 U.S. 257
    , 264 (1978) (quoting United States v.
    Robinson, 
    361 U.S. 220
    , 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have
    thirty days within which to file in the district court notices of
    appeal from judgments or final orders. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1).
    The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district
    court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or
    reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).
    The district court entered its order on December 19, 1997;
    McKinney's notice of appeal was filed on March 4, 1998, which is
    beyond the thirty-day appeal period. McKinney's failure to note a
    timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves
    this   court   without   jurisdiction   to   consider   the   merits   of
    McKinney's appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense
    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 98-1337

Filed Date: 6/10/1998

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021