Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Wynn v. AC Rochester
Citation: 34 F. App'x 806Docket: Docket No. 01-7437
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; May 10, 2002; Federal Appellate Court
The decision of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, dated March 15, 2001, is affirmed. Plaintiff-appellant James I. Wynn, Jr., representing himself, appealed the court's denial of his motion to interpret a June 14, 2000 letter as a request for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal regarding an earlier order. Wynn's initial lawsuit in 1995 involved allegations of fraud and misrepresentation against AC Rochester, General Motors Corporation, and personnel supervisor Charles Volo. Following the withdrawal of his attorney, Nira Kermisch, and a dispute over attorney's fees, the district court allowed Wynn to secure his case file by depositing $1,500 as collateral and paying Kermisch $332. After the district court granted summary judgment for the defendants and dismissed Wynn's complaint, he sought the return of the $1,500. The court denied this request, ruling that Wynn did not prove a contingency fee agreement existed with Kermisch and that she was entitled to the funds under quantum meruit principles. Wynn's June 14, 2000 letter, which objected to the court's April 28, 2000 order, was reviewed on remand. The district court concluded that the letter did not indicate a desire for an extension of time or serve as a notice of appeal. The appellate court upheld this conclusion, finding no abuse of discretion by the district court in its interpretation of Wynn's letter. Therefore, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.