Filed: Dec. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-3221 _ David Gerard Jeep, and heir lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Government of the United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis _ Submitted: October 31, 2016 Filed: December 22, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. David Jeep filed a notice of appeal while t
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-3221 _ David Gerard Jeep, and heir lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Government of the United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis _ Submitted: October 31, 2016 Filed: December 22, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. David Jeep filed a notice of appeal while th..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-3221
___________________________
David Gerard Jeep, and heir
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Government of the United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: October 31, 2016
Filed: December 22, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
David Jeep filed a notice of appeal while this action was pending. After careful
review, we dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction because Jeep’s notice
of appeal did not designate the order, judgment, or part thereof that he was appealing.
See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B) (notice of appeal must designate judgment, order, or
part thereof being appealed); Smith v. Barry,
502 U.S. 244, 248 (1992) (Rule 3
requirements are jurisdictional). We also deny as moot Jeep’s pending motion for
leave to appeal in forma pauperis.
______________________________
-2-