The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
21-12534•Piero A. Bugoni v. Broward County Florida, et al.
21-12534Court of Appeals for the Eleventh CircuitJun 10, 2022
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 21-12534
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
PIERO A. BUGONI,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BROWARD COUNTY FLORIDA,
a Municipal Corporation and Political Subdivision
of The State of Florida,
GREGORY TONY,
Supervising Officer,
BCSO DEPUTY SEPOT,
Individually and in his Official Capacity as an Officer,
for-profit of the State of Florida,
BCSO DEPUTY ALVAREZ,
Individually and in his Official Capacity as an Officer,
USCA11 Case: 21-12534 Date Filed: 06/10/2022 Page: 1 of 3
-- 1 of 3 --
2 Opinion of the Court 21-12534
for-profit of the State of Florida,
BCSO DEPUTY FITZPATRICK,
Individually and in his Official Capacity as an Officer,
for-profit of the State of Florida,
Defendants-Appellees,
EMERALD TOWING,
a Florida Corporation, et al.,
Defendants.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 0:20-cv-61236-WPD
____________________
Before R OSENBAUM , JILL PRYOR , and G RANT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Piero Bugoni repeatedly filed late responses to motions to
dismiss his complaint, eventually leading the district court to
dismiss the case by default. That pattern continued here. He
appealed more than three months after the district court dismissed
USCA11 Case: 21-12534 Date Filed: 06/10/2022 Page: 2 of 3
-- 2 of 3 --
21-12534 Opinion of the Court 3
his case, and more than a month after the court denied what it
treated as a motion to amend or make additional findings and a
motion for reconsideration.
The “timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a
jurisdictional requirement.”
Green v. Drug Enf ’t Admin., 606 F.3d
1296, 1300 (11th Cir. 2010) (quotation omitted). The appellate
rules generally require a party in a civil case to file a notice of appeal
“within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed
from.” Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). But when a party timely files
certain post-judgment motions—including motions for
reconsideration and motions to amend or make additional
findings—“the time to file an appeal runs for all parties from the
entry of the order disposing of the last such remaining motion.”
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A). The “entry” of that last order occurred
on June 22, 2021, when the district court entered its denial of the
motion for reconsideration in the civil docket.
See Fed. R. App. P.
4(a)(7)(A)(i). But Bugoni did not appeal until July 28, 2021.
His appeal is therefore DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
USCA11 Case: 21-12534 Date Filed: 06/10/2022 Page: 3 of 3
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.