Charles Williams v. Consol. Rail Corp., 767 F.2d 923 (6th Cir. 1985). · Go Syfert
Search
Charles Williams v. Consol. Rail Corp., 767 F.2d 923 (6th Cir. 1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
18 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 9 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Western Electric Co., Inc. (dcd, 1988-06-22)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" United States v. Western Electric Co., Inc.
D.D.C. · 1988 · signal: see · confidence high
See Windsor v. A Federal Executive Agency, 614 F.Supp. 1255, 1264 (M.D.Tenn.1983), aff'd, 767 F.2d 923 (6th Cir.1985).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Brennan v. National Telephone Directory Corp.
E.D. Pa. · 1994 · signal: see also · confidence low
Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 1324 (2nd ed. 1990) (Rule 10(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires separate counts for claims arising out of separate occurrences and transactions); see also Windsor v. A Federal Executive Agency, 614 F.Supp. 1255, 1257 (D.Tenn.1983) (courts usually delete evidentiary matters when they are pled by plaintiff in the complaint), aff'd, 767 F.2d 923 (6th Cir.1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Charles Williams
v.
Consolidated Rail Corporation
85-3025.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Jun 7, 1985.
767 F.2d 923
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Unpublished

767 F.2d 923

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
CHARLES WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.

NO. 85-3025

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

6/7/85

N.D.Ohio

APPEAL DISMISSED

ORDER

BEFORE: MERRITT, WELLFORD and MILBURN, Circuit Judges.

1

This appeal has been referred to this panel of the Court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

2

A review of the record indicates that a memorandum and order dismissing the civil action was entered by the district court on December 13, 1984. Appellant timely served and filed a Rule 59(e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, motion for reconsideration on December 24, 1984, which tolled the appeals period pursuant to Rule 4(a)(4), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. On December 24, 1984, appellant also filed a notice of appeal. Reconsideration was denied on January 11, 1985. No new notice of appeal as required by Rule 4(a)(4), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, was filed. The December 24, 1984, notice of appeal filed before the ruling on the motion for reconsideration has no effect. Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56 (1982); Portis v. Harris County, Texas, 632 F.2d 486 (5th Cir. 1980).

3

It is ORDERED that the appeal be and it hereby is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to a premature notice of appeal. Rule 9(d)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.