Bilal Al-Haqq v. Evonne Willingham, No. 23-7089 (4th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-7089 BILAL A. AL-HAQQ, a/k/a Michael Dion McFadden, a/k/a Michael D. Mcfadden, a/k/a Bilal Abdullah Al-Haqq, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WARDEN EVONNE WILLINGHAM; ASSOCIATE WARDEN ELAINE FREEMAN; BRYAN P. STIRLING; ASSOCIATE WARDEN ANN SHEPPARD, Defendants - Appellees, and SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; WARDEN BRIAN KENDALL; NURSE GRISSOM; PATTY BRITT-POOSER; MS. BROWN, Grievance Coordinator, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (2:21-cv-04139-DCC) Submitted: February 27, 2024 Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Decided: March 1, 2024 Bilal A. Al-Haqq, Appellant Pro Se. Norma Anne Turner Jett, NESS & JETT, LLC, Bamberg, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Bilal A. Al-Haqq seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil action. Appellees move to dismiss the appeal. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. In civil cases, parties have 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court entered its order on October 3, 2022. Al-Haqq filed the notice of appeal on October 13, 2023. * Because Al-Haqq failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we grant Appellees’ motion and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the cover letter for the notice of appeal is the earliest date Al-Haqq could have delivered the notice to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). * 3
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.
