Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 17 views

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Herman Joseph Jaindl filed an appeal under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 eight days before the district court entered judgment for the defendants. This appeal was premature under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), which deprived the appeals court of jurisdiction. Additionally, Jaindl failed to specify the order being appealed in the notice of appeal, which did not comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c). As a result, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    17 views2 pages
    Herman Joseph Jaindl filed an appeal under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 eight days before the district court entered judgment for the defendants. This appeal was premature under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), which deprived the appeals court of jurisdiction. Additionally, Jaindl failed to specify the order being appealed in the notice of appeal, which did not comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c). As a result, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1993-05-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 993 F.2d 1537 Docket: 93-6272

    Original Title

    Herman Joseph Jaindl v. Warden, Washington County Detention Center Charles Mades Wayne McAllister Ronald Long Ed Long Deputy Powell John Doe, Corporal John Doe, Deputy First Class John Doe, Deputy Janis Bowman, in Their Individual and Official Capacities Maryland Attorney General Washington County (Md) State Attorney, 993 F.2d 1537, 1st Cir. (1993)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Herman Joseph Jaindl filed an appeal under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 eight days before the district court entered judgment for the defendants. This appeal was premature under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), which deprived the appeals court of jurisdiction. Additionally, Jaindl failed to specify the order being appealed in the notice of appeal, which did not comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c). As a result, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    17 views2 pages

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Herman Joseph Jaindl filed an appeal under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 eight days before the district court entered judgment for the defendants. This appeal was premature under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), which deprived the appeals court of jurisdiction. Additionally, Jaindl failed to specify the order being appealed in the notice of appeal, which did not comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c). As a result, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    993 F.

    2d 1537

    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.
    Herman Joseph JAINDL, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN, Washington County Detention Center; Charles
    Mades;
    Wayne McAllister; Ronald Long; Ed Long; Deputy Powell;
    John Doe, Corporal; John Doe, Deputy First Class; John
    Doe, Deputy; Janis Bowman, in their individual and official
    capacities; Maryland Attorney General; Washington County
    (Md) State Attorney, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 93-6272.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 3, 1993
    Decided: May 28, 1993

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CA-92-1624-JFM)
    Herman Joseph Jaindl, Appellant Pro Se.
    Matthew Thomas Angotti, Anderson, Coe & King, Baltimore, Maryland;
    John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Steven Giles Hildenbrand,
    Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland; Daniel Karp, Allen,
    Johnson, Alexander & Karp, Baltimore, Maryland; D'Ana Edwina
    Johnson, Allen, Johnson, Alexander & KARP, Washington, D.C., for
    Appellees.
    D.Md.

    AFFIRMED.
    Before RUSSELL and HALL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    OPINION
    1

    Herman Joseph Jaindl filed this Notice of Appeal eight days prior to the district
    court's entry of judgment for the Defendants in Jaindl's civil action under 42
    U.S.C. 1983 (1988). Jaindl did not specify the order that was being appealed.

    This appeal is premature under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1),* thus depriving this
    Court of jurisdiction. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459
    U.S. 56 (1982). We note that, by failing to specify the order being appealed, the
    Notice of Appeal also fails to comply with Fed. R. App. P. 3(c). We therefore
    dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED

    Because no decision had yet been announced when this appeal was filed, Fed.
    R. App. P. 4(a)(2) cannot save it

    You might also like