Supreme Court of the United States
Thompson v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
January 6, 1964375 U.S. 384
Summary
The Court granted certiorari, held that the appeal was timely because the district court’s acceptance of the post‑trial motions tolled the filing period, vacated the Court of Appeals’ dismissal, and remanded for merits review. Justice Clark, dissenting, argued the motions were untimely and the Court lacked jurisdiction to grant relief.
Holding
- Whether the filing of post‑trial motions that the district court deemed timely tolls the time for filing an appeal under Rule 73(a) and thus makes the appeal timely.. The appeal was timely; the district court’s acceptance of the post‑trial motions tolled the appeal period, so the Court of Appeals’ dismissal was improper.
Docket 496
Cited authorities
- Rule 73
- Rule 73
- Rule 52
- Rule 73
- Rule 73
- Rule 52
- Rule 59
- Rule 59
Cited by
- Obaydullah, Detainee, Guantanamo Bay and Sami Al Hajj, as Next Friend of Obaydullah, Appellants v. Barack Obama…
- Sumner L. Feldberg and Ester Feldberg, Roger H. Goodspeed and Joann P. Goodspeed v. Quechee Lakes Corporation…
- Jason Lanakila Cabral; the Estate of Joseph Pu Kaikala; Lynda Evadna Kaikala
- Curacao Drydock Company, (n.y. Curacaose Dok Maatschappli) v. the M/v Akritas, Her Engines, Tackle, Apparel
- E. Edward Houghton v. County Commissioners of Kent County, Maryland
- United States of America, Appellee v. Steven P. Rapoport, Defendant, Appellant
- Gloria García-Velázquez; Juan Carlos Sifre-Rivera; C/p Sifre-García, Plaintiffs, Appellants v. Frito Lay Snacks…
- Judy E. Morris, M.d., Plaintiff, Appellant v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, Defendant, Appellee