Unpublished Dispositioncalvin Buchanan, Allen Barnett, James Harrison, Earlelliott, Willie Stewart, Rev, David Buchanan, Plaintiffs,eric D. Stoner, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Wallace Wilkinson, John T. Wigginton, al Parke, E. Mcknight,barbara Hickey, Defendants-appellees, 911 F.2d 731 (6th Cir. 1990)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - 911 F.2d 731 (6th Cir. 1990) Aug. 21, 1990

Before RYAN and ALAN E. NORRIS, Circuit Judges, and CELEBREZZE, Senior Circuit Judge.


ORDER

This matter is before the court upon consideration of the motion to withdraw Stewart as an appellant. The appellee has not responded.

A review of the documents before the court indicates that the civil action was dismissed by judgment entered February 20, 1990. Motions for an in camera hearing and for disqualification were served on February 23, 1990, and filed on February 27, 1990. Stoner filed a notice of appeal on March 2, 1990.

A motion which seeks reconsideration of a judgment and which is served within ten days of entry of a judgment is properly construed as a time-tolling Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. These motions were served within ten days of entry of the judgment and are construed as motions to reconsider. Thus, these motions tolled the appeal period. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (4); Marrical v. Detroit News, Inc. 805 F.2d 169, 171 (6th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) (4) provides that a notice of appeal filed before the disposition of a timely Rule 59 motion shall have no effect. A timely notice of appeal is mandatory and jurisdictional. Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 61 (1982) (per curiam). The district court has not ruled on the motions for in camera hearing and disqualification.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the appeal be, and it hereby is, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Rule 9(b) (1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. The motion to withdraw Stewart as an appellant is denied.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.