Legal Opinion
Penrod Drilling Company v. The United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided February 7, 1991No. 90-1414PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
The sole question in this appeal is whether the Court of International Trade improperly denied a motion retroactively to extend the time for appeal. We affirm.
I
On December 13, 1989, the Court of International Trade entered judgment dismissing four cases the appellant Penrod Drilling Company (Penrod) had filed to challenge certain rulings of the Customs Service. Under Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, made applicable to the Court of International Trade by 28 U.S.C. § 2645(c) (1988), Penrod’s time for filing a notice of appeal from that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Belfont Sales Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1988
- United States v. Keith W. Atkinson, an Individual, and St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Penrod Drilling Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1990
- Theodore Quintin v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
3Cited by15 opinions
- In the Matter of the Worker's Compensation Claim of Michael Vinson: Tata Chemicals Soda Ash Partners, Ltd v. Michael VinsonWyoming Supreme Court · 2020
- E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1998
- Dazzle Mfg., Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1997
- Melco Clothing Co., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1992
- Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2017
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.