The question
Whether a litigant who files a notice of appeal after the original appeal deadline but before the court grants reopening under 28 U.S.C. 2107(c) must file a second notice of appeal after reopening is granted.
Parrish v. United States
What the Court decided
Reversed and remanded. A litigant who files a notice of appeal after the original deadline but before the court grants reopening does not need to file a second notice after reopening. The original notice relates forward to the date reopening is granted. The Fourth Circuit had held that Parrish's failure to file a new notice within the reopened period deprived it of jurisdiction, and the Court rejected that ruling.
How the justices split
8-1The Court's opinion
Sotomayor, joined by Roberts, Alito, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Barrett
A notice of appeal filed before reopening is granted is merely early, not late, and under the longstanding common-law relation-forward rule it relates forward to the date the court grants reopening. Section 2107(c) gives no indication that Congress meant to terminate that rule, so a second notice after reopening is not required.
Concurring in the judgment
Jackson, joined by Thomas
Agreed with the outcome that Parrish's original notice of appeal sufficed but did not join the reasoning of the Court's opinion.
Dissenting
Gorsuch, writing alone
Would have dismissed the case as improvidently granted and left the question to the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules, which had already begun studying a rule change; did not reach whether the early notice relates forward.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The Court held that a litigant who files a notice of appeal after the original deadline but before reopening is granted need not file a second notice after reopening.
Source: syllabus, Held
The original notice of appeal relates forward to the date reopening is granted.
Source: syllabus, Held
Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Roberts, Alito, Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
Source: syllabus, lineup
Jackson filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, joined by Thomas.
Source: syllabus, lineup
Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion.
Source: syllabus, lineup