CA6 (Appeals): Isert v. Ford Mtr Co (WD Ky 8/25/2006)

Isert v. Ford Mtr Co
Western District of Kentucky at Louisville

06a0318p.06   8/25/2006

SUTTON, Circuit Judge. A few days before the deadline for filing a notice of appeal in this case, Scott and Tammy Isert, through their attorney, filed a motion in the district court asking for an extension of time in which “to file any Notice of Appeal.” JA 407. The court denied the motion, and the Iserts do not challenge that ruling. What they do contend is that their motion for an extension of time contained sufficient information to satisfy the requirements for a notice of appeal under Rule 3(c) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Because the motion failed to designate the judgment being appealed and otherwise failed objectively to convey an intent to appeal, it did not satisfy the form or function requirements of Rule 3(c). We dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.