Santiago Toscani v. Nader Rahbe ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                     IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    AT KNOXVILLE
    July 1, 2011 Session
    SANTIAGO TOSCANI V. NADER RAHBE
    Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County
    No. 10C999      L. Marie Williams, Judge
    No. E2011-00294-COA-R3-CV-FILED-JULY 1, 2011
    The order from which the appellant Nader Rahbe seeks to appeal was entered on Wednesday,
    January 5, 2011. A notice of appeal was filed by the appellant on Tuesday, February 8, 2011,
    the 34th day following the entry of the trial court’s order. Because the notice of appeal was
    not timely filed, we have no jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Accordingly, the motion of
    the appellee to dismiss is granted. This appeal is dismissed.
    Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed
    C HARLES D. S USANO, JR., D. M ICHAEL S WINEY, AND J OHN W. M CC LARTY, JJ.
    Curtis L. Bowe, III, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellant, Nader Rahbe.
    Robin Ruben Flores, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellee, Santiago Toscani.
    MEMORANDUM OPINION 1
    Our jurisdiction of this Tenn. R. App. P. 3 appeal as of right is dependent upon the
    timely filing of a notice of appeal. Albert v. Frye, 
    145 S.W.3d 526
    , 528 (Tenn. 2004). In
    the instant case, the day of the relevant order, i.e., January 5, 2011, is not counted in
    determining the last day of the 30-day period of time for the filing of a notice of appeal. See
    Tenn. R. App. P. 21(a). Therefore, there were 26 days left in January and 4 days in February
    1
    Rule 10 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals provides as follows:
    This Court, with the concurrence of all judges participating in the case, may
    affirm, reverse or modify the actions of the trial court by memorandum
    opinion when a formal opinion would have no precedential value. When
    a case is decided by memorandum opinion it shall be designated
    “MEMORANDUM OPINION,” shall not be published, and shall not be
    cited or relied on for any reason in any unrelated case.
    within which the appellant could file his notice of appeal. Hence, the last day the notice
    could be timely filed was Friday, February 4, 2011. It follows that the notice of appeal filed
    February 8, 2011, was not timely filed. We have no jurisdiction to hear the appellant’s
    appeal.
    The appeal of Nader Rahbe is dismissed with costs on appeal taxed to him.
    PER CURIAM
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: E2011-00294-COA-R3-CV

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 7/1/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014