Loza v. D.C. Office of Human Rights

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied Berkeley Research Group’s motion to dismiss Christopher Loza’s appeal as untimely. The court held that D.C. App. R. 4(a)(6) extended the time to appeal because the challenged order was signed outside the presence of the parties and counsel, making Loza’s notice of appeal timely.

Holdings

1. D.C. App. R. 4(a)(6) applies to all judgments or final orders signed or decided outside the presence of the parties or counsel, including orders served electronically and immediately.
2. Loza's September 15, 2022 notice of appeal was timely because Rule 4(a)(6) extended the applicable filing period and the notice was filed within that period.

Questions Presented

1. Whether D.C. App. R. 4(a)(6) applies to a written order signed outside the presence of the parties and counsel, thereby extending the time for filing a notice of appeal by five days.
2. Whether Loza's September 15, 2022 notice of appeal was timely.

Disposition

other