Legal Opinion
Howard v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided March 1, 1991No. 90-321CPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOODY R. TIDWELL, III, Judge.
ORDER
This case is before the court on plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauper-is, and his motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal based on excusable neglect, or good cause. Defendant opposed the motion for an extension of time. For the reasons set forth below, the court denies both of plaintiff’s motions.
FACTS
On September 26, 1990, this court dismissed plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim. On October 4,1990, plaintiff filed a motion for rehearing and reconsideration which the court denied. The Clerk of the court entered…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Browder v. Director, Dept. of Corrections of Ill.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- In Re Leasing Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Reinsurance Company of America, Inc. v. Administratia Asigurarilor De Stat (Administration of State Insurance)Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Penrod Drilling Company v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Prestex, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 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
- David L. Howard v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992