820 F2d 1220 Woltz v. Wilt Bbcf

820 F.2d 1220
Unpublished Disposition

Robert Walter WOLTZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,
John WILT, Warden, B.B.C.F.; Mr. Paris, Classification
Officer, B.B.C.F.; Mr. Langford, Co.O, B.B.C.F.; Dr.
Deshay M.D., MHC; Major Kelly, B.B.C.F.; Donald S.
Morrison, R.N., B.B.C.F.; Captain Heard, C.O., B.B.C.F.;
Hank Musk, Ph.D., DOC; Mr. Epps, C.O.; Mr. Williams, P.A.,
B.B.C.F.; Sgt. McElroy, C.O., B.B.C.F.; Sgt. Lilly, C.O.,
B.B.C.F.; Lt. White, C.O., B.B.C.F.; Lt. Bishop, C.O.,
B.B.C.F.; Officer Neal, C.O., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 87-7007.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 27, 1987.
Decided June 8, 1987.

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Before HALL, PHILLIPS and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.

Robert Walter Woltz, appellant pro se.

Richard M. Kastendieck, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, for appellees.


view counter

Robert W. Woltz appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. Judgment was entered against Woltz on May 22, 1986, and he had until June 23, 1986, to note his appeal or until July 23, 1986, to request an extension of time. See Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), (5). Woltz corresponded with the court on August 29, 1986; he then filed his notice of appeal on September 29, 1986. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss Woltz's appeal as untimely.


This Court has no jurisdiction over untimely appeals. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 61 (1982). While there may have been some mix-up as to Woltz's address, failure to receive notice of entry of judgment will not affect the time to appeal or relieve the party of failure to appeal within the time allowed. See Hensley v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., 651 F.2d 226, 228-29 (4th Cir.1981); Fed.R.Civ.P. 77(d). Thus, we grant appellees' motion to dismiss Woltz's appeal. Because the dispositive issues have recently been authoritatively decided, we dispense with oral argument.