Richard Connally v. Ron Ashton, No. 06-4087 (8th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - employment discrimination. Appeal dismissed as the Notice of Appeal was untimely.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-4087 ___________ Richard Connally; * * Appellant, * * Clarence Washington, II; Victor L. * Winzer; James E. Phillips, * * Plaintiffs, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Ron Ashton, in his individual and * Western District of Missouri. official capacity as President of * American Ingredients Company; * [UNPUBLISHED] American Ingredients Company; Mike * Roepke, Business Representative, * Association of Machinists and * Aerospace Workers Union; Joe * McCarthy; Gordon Breast, Warehouse * Manager, Individual and Official * Capacity; Jay Cherry; International * Association of Machinists and * Aerospace Workers, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: November 16, 2007 Filed: November 20, 2007 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Richard Connally appeals the district court s1 dismissal of his employmentdiscrimination action. Upon careful review, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Connally s December 4 notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days of the October 2 entry of judgment, and his October 27 motion to vacate the judgment did not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) (notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after judgment is entered); Fed. R. App. 4(a)(4)(A) (if party timely files Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion or Rule 60 motion no later than 10 days after judgment is entered, time to file appeal runs for all parties from entry of order disposing of last remaining motion); Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) (motion to alter or amend judgment shall be filed no later than 10 days after entry of judgment); Arnold v. Wood, 238 F.3d 992, 995-96 (8th Cir. 2001) (time for filing NOA was not tolled where plaintiff did not file his Rule 59(e) and 60(b) motion within 10 days of entry of judgment); Dieser v. Cont l Cas. Co., 440 F.3d 920, 923 (8th Cir. 2006) (timely NOA is mandatory and jurisdictional, and court will raise jurisdictional issues sua sponte). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and Connally s pending motion on appeal is denied as moot. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. -2-
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.
