From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cureton v. Vance

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jan 10, 2018
CASE NO. 16-CV-12628 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 10, 2018)

Opinion

CASE NO. 16-CV-12628

01-10-2018

JAMIL CURETON, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY VANCE, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR TIME EXTENSION

Pro se Plaintiff Jamil Cureton filed an untimely notice of appeal which the Sixth Circuit remanded to this court to consider in the first instance whether Plaintiff's time for filing a notice of appeal should be extended pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5). Plaintiff alleges cause exists for his untimeliness because as a pro se litigant, he was unaware of the filing deadline until he conducted a Google search sometime after the deadline had passed, and was unaware that he could proceed without paying the filing fee. Defendants oppose the time extension sought on the grounds that Plaintiff has not shown "excusable neglect or good cause" as required under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A)(ii). Plaintiff's only basis for the time extension is his ignorance of the law.

"Excusable neglect has been held to be a strict standard which is met only in extraordinary cases." Nicholson v. City of Warren, 467 F.3d 525, 526 (6th Cir. 2006). Plaintiff has not demonstrated any extraordinary circumstances beyond his power of control which would justify his late filing. "Ignorance of the rules or mistakes in construing the rules do not usually constitute excusable neglect." Id. (citing Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 507 U.S. 380, 392 (1993)). Even "mistakes by those who proceed without counsel are not necessarily excusable." Id. at 527 (citing McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106, 113 (1993)). Here, Plaintiff has not offered any reason, other than his own lack of diligence, for failing to meet the deadline for filing his notice of appeal. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for a time extension to file his notice of appeal (Doc. 27) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 10, 2018

s/George Caram Steeh

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE


Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on

January 10, 2018, by electronic and/or ordinary mail and also

on Jamil Cureton, 801 East Woodcroft Parkway, Apt. 1831,

Durham, NC 27713.


s/Barbara Radke

Deputy Clerk


Summaries of

Cureton v. Vance

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jan 10, 2018
CASE NO. 16-CV-12628 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 10, 2018)
Case details for

Cureton v. Vance

Case Details

Full title:JAMIL CURETON, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY VANCE, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Jan 10, 2018

Citations

CASE NO. 16-CV-12628 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 10, 2018)