Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Graphic Communs. Int'l Union, Local 12-N v. Quebecor Printing Providence, Inc.

Graphic Communs. Int'l Union, Local 12-N v. Quebecor Printing Providence, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

October 25, 2001, Decided

Nos. 00-2127, 00-2521

Opinion

 [*2]  LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. On December 16, 1998, Quebecor Printing Providence, Inc. and Quebecor Printing (USA) Corp. (collectively, "Quebecor") announced the permanent closure of their gravure printing plant in Providence, Rhode Island, effective that same day. Graphic Communications International Union, Local 12-N and Graphic Communications International Union, Local 239-M ("the Unions") filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, claiming that Quebecor had violated the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act ("WARN Act"), 29 U.S.C. § 2102 [**2]  (a), which requires that employers provide 60 days notice of a plant closing. On July 21, 2000, the district court entered judgment pursuant to a memorandum and order granting Quebecor's motion for summary judgment and denying the Unions' cross-motion for summary judgment. The Unions filed a notice of appeal with the district court on August 22, 2000, one day after the 30-day period for filing the notice of appeal had expired. The Unions then moved for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal due to excusable neglect, and the district court denied their motion. The Unions appeal both the denial of that motion and the district court's disposition of the cross-motions for summary judgment. Because the district court acted within its discretion in rejecting the Unions' motion for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal, we affirm that decision, and do not reach the merits of the Unions' WARN Act claim.

The district court decided the summary judgment motions in favor of Quebecor on the merits of the Unions' WARN Act claims in a memorandum and order issued on July 20, 2000, and the clerk entered judgment the next day. Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A),  [**3]  the Unions had until August 21, 2000 to file the notice of appeal.

On Thursday, August 17, Peter J. Leff, the Unions' Washington counsel, sent a notice of appeal and a check for the cost  [*3]  via Express Mail to Marc Gursky, the Unions' Providence counsel. Leff telephoned Gursky, either on August 17 or the day before, to alert him to expect the package. Although it was guaranteed to arrive at its destination the morning of Friday, August 18, the Postal Service did not attempt to deliver the package to Gursky's firm until 7:00 a.m. on Saturday, August 19, when no one was there to sign for it. A second delivery attempt was made at 2:14 p.m. on Monday, August 21, and was successful.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

270 F.3d 1 *; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 22874 **; 144 Lab. Cas. (CCH) P11,139; 51 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 127

GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 12-N AND GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 239-M, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. QUEBECOR PRINTING PROVIDENCE, INC. AND QUEBECOR PRINTING (USA) CORP., Defendants, Appellees.

Prior History:  [**1]  APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND. Hon. Mary M. Lisi, U.S. District Judge.

Disposition: Denial of motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal was affirmed.

CORE TERMS

excusable neglect, district court, notice of appeal, file a notice of appeal, extraordinary circumstances, extension of time, neglect, package, Plaintiffs', ignorance, late filing, circumstances, deadline, marks

Civil Procedure, Appeals, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Timing of Appeals, Governments, Legislation, Statute of Limitations, Time Limitations, Pleadings, Time Limitations, Extension of Time, General Overview, Standards of Review, Abuse of Discretion, De Novo Review, Pleading & Practice, Motion Practice, Judicial Officers, Judges, Discretionary Powers