Court Opinion

ID: 9945459
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-27 21:00:43.572615+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:29.837455
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2039     Doc: 13         Filed: 02/26/2024    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                  FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-2039

        ROGER LEE MORSE,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; CHADWICK DOTSON, in his
        individual and official capacity as Director for the Virginia Department of
        Corrections; PATRICIA S. BISHOP, in her individual and official capacity as
        Director for the Virginia Retirement System; JOSEPH WALTERS, in his individual
        and official capacity as Deputy Director of Administration for Virginia Department
        of Corrections; BETH CABELL, in her individual and official capacity as Warden;
        TONY DARDEN, in his Individual and official capacity as Assistant Warden;
        KEVIN CLARK, in his individual and official capacity as Major, Correctional
        Officer; CHRISTOPHER M. GRAB; WILLIAM MUSE, in his individual and
        official capacity as Hearing Officer for the Office of Employment Dispute
        Resolution; CARL W. SCHMIDT, in his individual and official capacity as Hearing
        Officer for the Office of Employment Dispute Resolution; ROBIN H. LOW, in her
        individual and official capacity as Supervisor of Purchase of Prior Service for the
        Virginia Retirement System,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:21-cv-00168-MHL)

        Submitted: February 22, 2024                                Decided: February 26, 2024

        Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-2039      Doc: 13         Filed: 02/26/2024    Pg: 2 of 3

        Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Roger Lee Morse, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Nicholas Regnery, Assistant Attorney
        General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia,
        for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 23-2039       Doc: 13         Filed: 02/26/2024     Pg: 3 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Roger Lee Morse seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing Morse’s

        second amended civil complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), and denying Morse’s

        motion for the appointment of counsel. In civil cases, parties have 30 days after the entry

        of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A),

        unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens

        the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal

        in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

               The district court entered its dispositive order on August 11, 2023. Morse did not

        file his notice of appeal until October 2, 2023, which was 21 days after the appeal period

        expired, but within the 30-day excusable neglect period. Morse’s notice of appeal and

        informal reply brief contain language that we liberally construe as a request for an

        extension of time to appeal. Accordingly, we remand the case to the district court for a

        determination of whether Morse can establish excusable neglect or good cause warranting

        an extension of the 30-day appeal period. ∗ The record, as supplemented, will then be

        returned to this court for further consideration.

                                                                                       REMANDED

               ∗
                 Under Rule 4(a)(5), the district court may extend the time to appeal if (i) a party
        moves for an extension of time within 30 days of the expiration of the appeal period and
        (ii) shows excusable neglect or good cause.

                                                      3