2009 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

7-13-2009

James Kosa v. Ronald Lynch

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 08-2391

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2009 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"James Kosa v. Ronald Lynch" (2009). 2009 Decisions. Paper 1025.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009/1025
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

No. 08-2391

 

JAMES KOSA 

v.

RONALD LYNCH,

 Appellant

 

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. No. 2-03-cv-03857)

District Judge: Honorable Anita B. Brody

 

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

July 6, 2009

Before: SLOVITER, AMBRO, and JORDAN, Circuit Judges

(Filed: July 13, 2009)

 

 OPINION

 
 Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(e) of the Eastern 1

District of Pennsylvania provides that a post-trial motion may be

dismissed for lack of prosecution if the movant fails to order a

transcript of the trial, or file a motion showing good cause to be

exempted from that requirement, within fourteen days after filing

the motion.

 Pursuant to the local rules of this court, an appeal may be 2

dismissed when the appellant, after receiving notice from the clerk,

fails to timely correct a defect in the appeal under the Federal Rules

of Appellate Procedure or our Rules. See 3d Cir. R. 107.2.

2

SLOVITER, Circuit Judge.

Appellant Ronald Lynch and James Kosa were partners in a business providing

marketing and advertising services. The relationship disintegrated and Kosa sued Lynch

in state court seeking dissolution of the partnership, an accounting, and related relief. 

Lynch removed the case to federal court based on diversity of citizenship. The 

matter was submitted to a jury, which found for Kosa in the amount of $78,062; judgment

was entered on July 25, 2005.

Lynch filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) for judgment as

a matter of law but failed to prosecute timely and the District Court dismissed the motion

in an order entered September 1, 2005. Lynch then appealed to this court which, on 1

September 28, 2006, dismissed the appeal for Lynch’s failure to timely file a brief. On 2

April 14, 2008, the District Court entered an order directing satisfaction of the judgment

entered in favor of Kosa, as well as related costs and interest, out of certain funds held in

escrow for that purpose. Although that is the order on appeal, Lynch does not challenge
that order, but rather raises a number of claims attacking the underlying judgment. 

Lynch is essentially seeking a second bite at the apple, but the time for raising any

challenges to the underlying judgment has clearly passed under Federal Rule of Appellate

Procedure 4. Lynch raises no challenges specific to the District Court’s April 14, 2008,

order enforcing the judgment, and we see no reason to set it aside.

For the above-stated reasons, we will affirm the order of the District Court.

3