Newcomb v. Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc., No. 19-3109 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiffs, attorneys and their law firm who specialize in timeshare exits for Missouri customers, filed suit in state court alleging time-share fraud. WVO, through its counsel, S&B, filed suit against plaintiffs in the district court for tortious conduct related to their timeshare exit business (the Florida Action).
The Eighth Circuit dismissed the consolidated appeals based on lack of jurisdiction, concluding that the notices of appeal were entirely deficient under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3(c)(1) because they appeal an order entered on a day when no order issued, from a district court that does not exist, to a court of appeals that does not exist. The court explained that the complete failure by parties who are attorneys engaged in multi-state litigation to comply with multiple essential elements of Rule 3(c)(1) is not "imperfect but substantial compliance with a technical requirement" that the court may excuse. Rather, it is an absolute bar to appeal.
Court Description: [Loken, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge, and Melloy, Circuit Judge] Civil case - Appellate Procedure. The notices of appeal were completely deficient under FRAP 3(c)(1) as they stated the appeals were taken to the "United States Court of Appeals for the Southern District of Missouri," appealed an order entered on a day when no order was issued, and purported to be filed in a district court that does not exist (the United States District Court for the Southern District of Missouri); appeals dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
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.