Utah Court of Appeals
Can a late Rule 60(b) motion extend the deadline to appeal a judgment? Ahmad v. Graco Fishing Explained
Summary
Ahmad filed an untimely notice of appeal challenging various district court rulings after losing at trial to Graco Fishing. The court of appeals found it lacked jurisdiction over most issues because Ahmad’s Rule 60(b) motion, filed months after the original judgment, could not extend the appeal deadline under Rule 4 of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Analysis
The Utah Court of Appeals in Ahmad v. Graco Fishing addressed a critical timing issue that frequently arises in appellate practice: whether a Rule 60(b) motion filed long after entry of judgment can extend the deadline for appealing that judgment.
Background and Facts
After losing at trial to Graco Fishing, Ahmad faced a judgment entered on October 7, 2019. Pacific Energy (represented by the same attorney) filed a timely motion for new trial on November 1, 2019, which extended the appeal deadline. When the district court denied that motion on May 22, 2020, Ahmad had 30 days to appeal. Instead, he filed a Rule 60(b) motion on May 28, 2020, and didn’t file his notice of appeal until August 19, 2020—within 30 days of the court’s denial of the Rule 60(b) motion but well beyond the original deadlines.
Key Legal Issues
The central issue was whether Ahmad’s Rule 60(b) motion could extend the time to appeal the underlying judgment when filed months after the judgment was entered. Under Rule 4(b)(1)(E) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure, a Rule 60(b) motion extends appeal time only if “filed no later than 28 days after the judgment is entered.”
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The court of appeals applied the plain language of Rule 4, distinguishing between “judgment” and “dispositive order.” While Ahmad’s new trial motion properly extended the appeal deadline, his subsequent Rule 60(b) motion—filed more than seven months after the October 7, 2019 judgment—could not provide another extension. The court emphasized that successive post-judgment motions cannot indefinitely extend appeal deadlines, as this would undermine the finality of judgments.
Practice Implications
This decision reinforces the critical importance of timing in appellate practice. Practitioners must file Rule 60(b) motions within 28 days of the original judgment—not a subsequent dispositive order—if they intend to preserve appeal rights. The court rejected Ahmad’s argument that Rule 54’s broader definition of “judgment” applied to Rule 4’s appeal timing requirements, finding this argument waived when raised only in the reply brief.
Case Details
Case Name
Ahmad v. Graco Fishing
Citation
2022 UT App 55
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20200642-CA
Date Decided
May 5, 2022
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
A Rule 60(b) motion filed more than 28 days after entry of judgment cannot extend the time for appeal from the underlying judgment, regardless of when a dispositive order on a prior post-judgment motion was entered.
Standard of Review
Abuse of discretion for Rule 60(b) motions for relief from judgment
Practice Tip
File Rule 60(b) motions within 28 days of the judgment (not a subsequent dispositive order) if you intend to preserve appeal rights from the underlying judgment.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.