Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-01029/USCOURTS-ca10-90-01029-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David Bell
Appellee
Ed Clodfelter
Appellee
Ben Johnson
Appellee
Walter Kautzky
Appellee
Jack Parrish
Appellant

Document Text:

. ' FI LED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

SEP 2 8 1990 

.&OBERT L. HOECKER 

JACK PARRISH, Clerk 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

WALTER KAUTZKY; BEN JOHNSON; ED 

CLODFELTER; and DAVID BELL, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT * 

No. 90-1029 

(D.C. No. 89-C-1040) 

(D. Colo.) 

Before LOGAN, SEYMOUR, and TACHA, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Upon review of the record, we determine that we lack 

jurisdiction to hear this appeal. The order of the district court 

was entered on January 2, 1990. Appellant Parrish filed his 

notice of appeal on February 5, 1990, more than thirty days after 

the district court's order was filed. See Fed. R. App. P. 

4(a)(l). The filing requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional. 

* This order and 

not be cited, or 

except for purposes 

case, res judicata, 

judgment has no precedential value and shall 

used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

of establishing the doctrines of law of the 

or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-1029 Document: 010110053452 Date Filed: 09/28/1990 Page: 1 
Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London Y..=... Hamm, 896 F.2d 1255, 

1256 (10th Cir. 1990). 

Parrish did file an untimely motion to alter or amend 

judgment under Rule 59, Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). Because the motion 

was untimely, the time period for filing an appeal was not tolled 

during the pendency of the district court's consideration. 

Accordingly, we find that we lack jurisdiction. See Fed. R. App. 

P. 4(a). 

Appeal DISMISSED. 

2 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT, 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-1029 Document: 010110053452 Date Filed: 09/28/1990 Page: 2