/dzuhqfhy,qw¶o%kg Ri7hdpvwhuvhwdo 1r Conclusion… v. United States, No. 97-6338, 2000 WL 658072 6th Cir. May 9, 2000 . In Frazier, we…

/DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KG
RI7HDPVWHUVHWDO
1R
CONCLUSION
6LQFHWKH³XQLTXHFLUFXPVWDQFHV´UXOHGRHVQRWDSSO\ZH
GHFOLQH WR KHDU /DZUHQFH¶V DSSHDO LQDVPXFK DV /DZUHQFH
ILOHGKLVQRWLFHRIDSSHDOWZRGD\VODWH:H$)),50WKH
GLVWULFWFRXUW¶VGHQLDORI/DZUHQFH¶VUHTXHVWIRUUHOLHIIURP
MXGJPHQW

5(&200(1'(' )25 )8//7(;7 38%/,&$7,21
3XUVXDQW WR 6L[WK &LUFXLW 5XOH
(/(&7521,& &,7$7,21 )(' $SS 3 WK &LU
)LOH 1DPH DS
81,7('67$7(6&28572)$33($/6
)257+(6,;7+&,5&8,7
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
&$5/ /$:5(1&(
3ODLQWLII$SSHOODQW
Y
,17(51$7,21$/
%527+(5+22' 2)
7($067(56 &+$8))(856
:$5(+286(0(1 $1'
+(/3(56 2) $0(5,&$
:,//,$0 - 0&&$57<
&KDLUPDQRI7HDPVWHUV
1DWLRQDO)UHLJKW*HQHUDO
3UHVLGHQW521 &$5(<
6XFFHVVRU&KDLUPDQRI
7HDPVWHUV1DWLRQDO)UHLJKW
*HQHUDO3UHVLGHQW'(11,6 &
6.(/7211DWLRQDO)UHLJKW
'LUHFWRU&R&KDLUPDQ
7HDPVWHUV1DWLRQDO)UHLJKW
,QGXVWULDO1HJRWLDWLQJ
&RPPLWWHH-$0(6 $
0&&$//$VVRFLDWH*HQHUDO
&RXQVHO67(9(1 :$,70$1
3UHVLGHQWRI/RFDO
7($067(56 /2&$/ 81,21
12
'HIHQGDQWV$SSHOOHHV
;!

1
1R

-- 1 of 4 --

/DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KG
RI7HDPVWHUVHWDO
1R
7KH +RQRUDEOH :LOOLDP - +D\QHV -U 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 'LVWULFW -XGJH
IRU WKH 0LGGOH 'LVWULFW RI 7HQQHVVHH VLWWLQJ E\ GHVLJQDWLRQ
$SSHDOIURPWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV'LVWULFW&RXUW
IRUWKH1RUWKHUQ'LVWULFWRI2KLRDW7ROHGR
1R²-DPHV*&DUU'LVWULFW-XGJH
$UJXHG-DQXDU\
'HFLGHGDQG)LOHG)HEUXDU\
%HIRUH1(/621DQG&/$<&LUFXLW-XGJHV+$<1(6
'LVWULFW-XGJH
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
&2816(/
$5*8(' 7HUU\ / +RUG $GD 2KLR IRU $SSHOODQW
)UHGHULFN * &ORSSHUW -U &/233(57 /$7$1,&.
6$87(5 :$6+%851 &ROXPEXV 2KLR 'LDQD 6
%URZQ/2*27+(7,63(1&( '2//'D\WRQ2KLRIRU
$SSHOOHHV 21 %5,() 7HUU\ / +RUG $GD 2KLR IRU
$SSHOODQW )UHGHULFN * &ORSSHUW -U &/233(57
/$7$1,&.6$87(5 :$6+%851&ROXPEXV2KLR
'LDQD6%URZQ-RKQ5'ROO/2*27+(7,63(1&(
'2//'D\WRQ2KLRIRU$SSHOOHHV
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
23,1,21
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
&/$<&LUFXLW-XGJH3ODLQWLII&DUO/DZUHQFHDSSHDOVWKH
GHQLDORIKLVUHTXHVWIRUUHOLHIIURPMXGJPHQWSXUVXDQWWR)HG
5&LY3 E IROORZLQJDQRUGHURIVXPPDU\MXGJPHQW
DJDLQVW/DZUHQFHLQKLVEUHDFKRIGXW\RIIDLUUHSUHVHQWDWLRQ
FODLPDULVLQJXQGHU86&†:H$)),50
1R /DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KG
RI7HDPVWHUVHWDO

Hollins. See Frazier v. United States, No. 97-6338, 2000 WL
658072 (6th Cir. May 9, 2000). In Frazier, we dismissed an
attempt by counsel to blame the tardiness of his client’s
habeas petition on a clerk who allegedly provided the attorney
with improper filing information. Id. at *1. As we explained,
"this court has not subscribed to the Eleventh Circuit’s lenient
interpretation of the ‘unique circumstances’ exception." Id.
Second, prior to Osternak, we interpreted Thomson’s
holding this way: "[An] appeal would be considered timely
because the appellant had done something which would have
extended the time for appeal if properly done, and relied on
the district court's statement that it was done properly."
Denley v. Shearson/Am. Express, Inc., 733 F.2d 39, 42 (6th
Cir. 1984) (emphasis added). Although one could attempt to
interpret "district court" very broadly, to do so would strain
the meaning of "district court." Clerks and court personnel
work for the district court, they are not the district court.
Third, the Supreme Court has only applied the "unique
circumstances" doctrine in four cases. See Osternak, 489
U.S. 169, Wolfsohn v. Hankin, 376 U.S. 203 (1964);
Thompson, 375 U.S. 384; Harris Truck Lines, Inc. v. Cherry
Meat Packers, Inc., 371 U.S. 215 (1962). Each of these cases
involved mistaken court rulings or orders rather than poor
advice from a court clerk. See Osternak, 489 U.S. at 178;
Wolfsohn, 376 U.S. at 203-04; Thompson, 375 U.S. at 385-87;
Harris Truck Lines, 371 U.S. at 216-17.
Fourth, limiting the phrase "judicial officer" to judges
makes sense because "a formal order or ruling (1) generates
the highest level of justifiable reliance, and (2) raises virtually
no possibility of evidentiary problems for appellate courts
faced with applying the exception." Moore, 100 F.3d at 164.
Thus, policy and precedent each point strongly against the
lenient "unique circumstances" rule that Lawrence would
have this Court adopt.

-- 2 of 4 --

/DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KG
RI7HDPVWHUVHWDO
1R
only where a party has performed an act which, if properly
done, would postpone the deadline for filing his appeal and
has received specific assurance by a judicial officer that this
act has been properly done." Osterneck v. Ernst & Whitney,
489 U.S. 169, 179 (1989).
With one exception, every circuit to have considered the
issue has found that the phrase "judicial officer" in Osterneck
refers only to judges. See, e.g. Rezzonico v. H & R Block,
Inc., 182 F.3d 144, 152 (2d Cir. 1999) ("[S]tatements by a
member of the clerk's office staff are not official judicial
assurances that qualify as unique circumstances."); Moore v.
South Carolina Labor Bd., 100 F.3d 162, 164 (D.C. Cir.
1996) ("This case does not qualify for application of the
unique circumstances doctrine because although the
statements made by the clerk's office staff may constitute
specific assurances, they cannot fairly be characterized as
official judicial action."); United States v. Heller, 957 F.2d
26, 29 (1st Cir. 1992) ("We understand the term ‘judicial
officer’ in this context to mean a judge, not an employee in
the office of the clerk."); Sonicraft, Inc. v. NLRB, 814 F.2d
385, 387 (7th Cir. 1987) (reasoning that "judicial officers"
must mean judges because "subordinate employees of the
judiciary have no authority to waive congressional limitations
on judicial power").
In contrast to the weight of the authority, the Eleventh
Circuit has "decided that the unique circumstances doctrine
may apply where the appellant is lulled by assurances from
the clerk’s office instead of the district court itself." Hollins
v. Dep’t of Corr., 191 F.3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir. 1999). In
Hollins, counsel relied on a clerk’s office electronic docket
system to determine, incorrectly, that the court had not yet
filed a final order. Id.
Even assuming Hollins did not reflect an extreme minority
position, there are four reasons to firmly conclude that the
"unique circumstances" doctrine does not apply here. First,
albeit in an unpublished opinion, we have already rejected
1R /DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KG
RI7HDPVWHUVHWDO

%$&.*5281'
/DZUHQFHZRUNHGDVDWUXFNGULYHUIRU'XII7UXFN/LQH
,QF DQG LWV VXFFHVVRU 2. 7UXFNLQJ &RPSDQ\ ³2.´
IURPWKURXJK,QHDUO\2.ZDVVROGWR
:LQW]3DUFHO'ULYHUV ³:LQW]´ /DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KGRI
7HDPVWHUV,1R86$SS/(;,6DW
WK&LU-DQ 7KH,QWHUQDWLRQDO%URWKHUKRRG
RI 7HDPVWHUV &KDXIIHXUV :DUHKRXVHPHQ DQG +HOSHUV RI
$PHULFD ³,%7´ DQG LWV /RFDO ZHUH WKH H[FOXVLYH
EDUJDLQLQJDJHQWVIRUHPSOR\HHVRI2.7UXFNLQJ,GDW
,Q -DQXDU\ /DZUHQFH EHJDQ ILOLQJ JULHYDQFHV ZLWK
/RFDODOOHJLQJWKDW2.IDLOHGWRIROORZWKHFROOHFWLYH
EDUJDLQLQJDJUHHPHQW ³&%$´ ,G/DZUHQFHDOVRFODLPHG
WKDW:LQW]GLVFKDUJHGKLPLQYLRODWLRQRIWKH&%$ZKLFK
UHPDLQHGLQIRUFHDIWHU:LQW]SXUFKDVHG2.,G/DZUHQFH
GHPDQGHG WKDW 'HIHQGDQWV SURFHVV WKH JULHYDQFHV RQ KLV
EHKDOIDQGVHFXUHKLVUHLQVWDWHPHQWDORQJZLWKEDFNSD\DQG
EHQHILWV,G,QKLVFRPSODLQW/DZUHQFHFODLPHG'HIHQGDQWV
OHGKLPWREHOLHYHWKH\ZHUHSURFHVVLQJKLVJULHYDQFHVZKHQ
LQUHDOLW\WKH\WRRNQRDFWLRQ,GDW
2Q'HFHPEHU/DZUHQFHILOHGDFRPSODLQWLQWKH
&RXUWRI&RPPRQ3OHDVLQ$OOHQ&RXQW\2KLRDOOHJLQJWKDW
WKH ,QWHUQDWLRQDO %URWKHUKRRG RI 7HDPVWHUV &KDXIIHXUV
:DUHKRXVHPHQDQG+HOSHUVRI$PHULFD ,%7 VRPHRILWV
LQGLYLGXDO RIILFHUV DQG 6WHYHQ :DLWPDQ 3UHVLGHQW RI
7HDPVWHUV /RFDO 8QLRQ 1R PLVKDQGOHG HOHYHQ
JULHYDQFHV/DZUHQFHILOHGDJDLQVWKLVHPSOR\HU'HIHQGDQWV
UHPRYHG WKH FDVH WR IHGHUDO FRXUW 2Q -XO\ WKH
GLVWULFW FRXUW JUDQWHG 'HIHQGDQWV¶ PRWLRQV WR GLVPLVV
/DZUHQFH ILOHGDWLPHO\DSSHDORQ$XJXVW7KLV
&RXUW DIILUPHG WKH ORZHU FRXUW¶V UXOLQJ DV WR IRXU RI WKH
JULHYDQFHV EXW UHYHUVHG DV WR WKH UHPDLQLQJ VHYHQ 6HH
/DZUHQFH,86/(;,6
2Q-XO\WKHGLVWULFWFRXUWRUGHUHGWKDWLWZRXOG
QRWDFFHSWKDUGFRSLHVRISOHDGLQJVXQOHVVSURYLGHGIRULQLWV
(OHFWURQLF3ROLFLHVDQG3URFHGXUHV0DQXDO7KHUHDIWHUWKH

-- 3 of 4 --

/DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KG
RI7HDPVWHUVHWDO
1R
7KLV WUDFNV WKH SURFHGXUH WKLV &RXUW RXWOLQHG LQ Lewis v. Alexander,
)G WK &LU WKDW DWWRUQH\V VKRXOG IROORZ ZKHQ WKH\
GLVFRYHU DIWHU ILOLQJ DQ DSSHDO WKDW WKH DSSHDO LV XQWLPHO\
SDUWLHV FRQGXFWHG GLVFRYHU\ DQG 'HIHQGDQWV PRYHG IRU
VXPPDU\MXGJPHQWZKLFKWKHFRXUWJUDQWHGRQ0DUFK

(YLGHQWO\ GHIHQVH FRXQVHO KDG QHYHU ILOHG SDSHUV
HOHFWURQLFDOO\SULRUWRWKLVOLWLJDWLRQ$IWHUWKHGLVWULFWFRXUW
JUDQWHG'HIHQGDQWVVXPPDU\MXGJPHQWRQ0DUFK
GHIHQVH FRXQVHO FRQWDFWHG WKH FRXUW WR ILQG RXW ZKHQ KH
QHHGHGWRHOHFWURQLFDOO\ILOHKLVQRWLFHRIDSSHDO&RXQVHO
FODLPVWKDWZKHQKHDVNHGZKHWKHU$SULOZDVWKH
ODVWGD\WRILOHDQDSSHDODFOHUNDJUHHG
$SDUW\PXVWILOHDQRWLFHRIDSSHDOZLWKLQWKLUW\GD\VRI
HQWU\ RI WKH MXGJPHQW EHLQJ DSSHDOHG )HG 5 $SS 3
D ,QFDOFXODWLQJWKHWKLUW\GD\VWKHGD\RQZKLFKWKH
MXGJPHQWZDVHQWHUHGLVH[FOXGHGEXWWKHODVWGD\LVLQFOXGHG
XQOHVVLWLVD6DWXUGD\6XQGD\RUOHJDOKROLGD\)HG5$SS
3 D /DZUHQFHKDGWKLUW\GD\VDIWHU0DUFKRUXQWLO
$SULO$SULOZDVD:HGQHVGD\/DZUHQFH
ILOHGKLVDSSHDORQ$SULO
7KHUHFRUGVRIWKH&RXUWRI$SSHDOVUHIOHFWUHFHLSWRIWKDW
DSSHDORQ0D\2Q-XQHZLWKWKHDSSHDO
VWLOO SHQGLQJ /DZUHQFH PRYHG WKH GLVWULFW FRXUW IRU UHOLHI
IURPMXGJPHQWSXUVXDQWWR)HG5&LY3 E 7KHFRXUW
GHQLHG WKH E UHTXHVW RQ $XJXVW 2Q
6HSWHPEHU/DZUHQFHWLPHO\DSSHDOHGWKDWGHQLDO
:H WKHQ GLVPLVVHG WKH ILUVW DSSHDO DV XQWLPHO\ RQ
6HSWHPEHU/DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KGRI7HDPVWHUV
1R VOLS RS WK &LU 6HSW RUGHU
GLVPLVVLQJFDVHDVXQWLPHO\ILOHG
1R /DZUHQFHY,QW¶O%KG
RI7HDPVWHUVHWDO

',6&866,21
7KLV &RXUW ZLOO QRW UHYHUVH D GLVWULFW FRXUW¶V GHQLDO RI D
PRWLRQIRUUHOLHIIURPMXGJPHQWSXUVXDQWWR E XQOHVVLW
ILQGVDQDEXVHRIGLVFUHWLRQ-LQNVY$OOLHG6LJQDO,QF
)G WK &LU FLWLQJ 7KRPVRQ Y $P +RPH
$VVXUDQFH&R)G WK&LU :H
ILQGQRDEXVHRIGLVFUHWLRQKHUH
$ 7KH³8QLTXH&LUFXPVWDQFHV´'RFWULQH'HILQHG
,Q7KRPSVRQY,1686 WKHSODLQWLIIILOHG
DQXQWLPHO\PRWLRQIRUDQHZWULDO,GDW7KHGHIHQGDQW
GLG QRW REMHFW WR WKH XQWLPHO\ PRWLRQ DQG WKH WULDO FRXUW
DVVHUWHG WKDW WKH SODLQWLII KDG PDGH WKH PRWLRQ ³LQ DPSOH
WLPH´,G$IWHU WKHFRXUWXOWLPDWHO\GHQLHGWKHSRVWWULDO
PRWLRQWKHSODLQWLIIDSSHDOHG,G
$WWKHDSSHOODWHOHYHOWKHGHIHQGDQWDUJXHGWKDWWKHPRWLRQ
IRUDQHZWULDOZDVXQWLPHO\DQGWKXVGLGQRWWROOWKHWLPHIRU
ILOLQJWKHQRWLFHRIDSSHDO,GDW7KH6HYHQWK&LUFXLW
DJUHHG DQG GLVPLVVHG WKH DSSHDO DV XQWLPHO\ ,G 7KH
6XSUHPH&RXUWUHYHUVHGUXOLQJWKDWLWZDVWKHGLVWULFWFRXUW¶V
HUURU LQ ILQGLQJ WKH PRWLRQ IRU D QHZ WULDO WLPHO\ DQG WKH
SODLQWLII¶VMXVWLILDEOHUHOLDQFHRQWKDWILQGLQJWKDWFDXVHGWKH
SODLQWLIIWRDSSHDORXWVLGHWKHWLPHOLPLW,GDW8QGHU
WKHVH³XQLTXHFLUFXPVWDQFHV´WKH6XSUHPH&RXUWUHPDQGHG
WKHFDVHWRWKH6HYHQWK&LUFXLWZLWKLQVWUXFWLRQVWRFRQVLGHU
WKHPHULWVRIWKHSODLQWLII¶VDSSHDO,G
/DZUHQFHQRZDUJXHVWKDWWKLV&RXUWIROORZLQJ7KRPSVRQ
VKRXOGUHYHUVHWKHGLVWULFWFRXUW¶V GHQLDORIWKHPRWLRQIRU
UHOLHIIURPMXGJPHQWZKLFKZRXOGDOORZWKHORZHUFRXUWWR
HQWHU D QHZ MXGJPHQW DQG FRUUHVSRQGLQJO\ WR JUDQW
/DZUHQFHDGGLWLRQDOWLPHWRSHUIHFWKLVDSSHDO
% 7KH³8QLTXH&LUFXPVWDQFHV´5XOHLV,QDSSOLFDEOH
7KRPSVRQ LV GLVWLQJXLVKDEOH 7KH 6XSUHPH &RXUW
VXEVHTXHQWO\H[SODLQHGWKDW"[b]y its terms, Thompson applies

-- 4 of 4 --