Carter v. State of Michigan

Filing 17

ORDER DENYING 8 Motion for Relief from Judgment and Dismissing without Prejudice. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
THOMAS TYRONE CARTER,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 17-11074
Hon. Terrence G. Berg

v.
STATE OF MICHIGAN,
Defendant.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM
JUDGMENT AND DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
(Dkt. 8)
On March 28, 2018, this Court entered an Order denying
Thomas Tyrone Carter’s civil rights action requesting relief from
judgment, but did not indicate whether such dismissal was with or
without prejudice. Order, Dkt. 13. When a district court’s order
dismissing a claim or motion is “silent as to its prejudicial effect,”
that order is considered issued with prejudice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b);
Nafziger v. McDermott Int’l, Inc., 467 F.3d 514, 518 (6th Cir. 2006).
But claims dismissed on the basis of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S.
477 (1994)—as this one properly is—should be dismissed without
prejudice. See Callihan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 804 (6th Cir.
1999); see also Amaker v. Weiner, 179 F.3d 48, 52 (2d Cir. 1999)
(“Disposition of the case on Heck grounds, however, warrants only
1

dismissal without prejudice, because the suit may be reinstituted
should plaintiff's conviction be “expunged by executive order,
declared invalid by a state tribunal authorized to make such
determination, or called into question by a federal court's issuance
of a writ of habeas corpus.”) (quoting Heck, 512 U.S. at 487) (and
collecting cases).
On December 10, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Sixth Circuit entered an Order vacating this Court’s Order, and
remanding with instructions to dismiss Carter’s complaint without
prejudice. Carter v. Michigan, No. 18-1348 (6th Cir. Dec. 10, 2018).
The Court incorporates all factual and legal analysis from its March
28, 2018 Order, as well as that of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals’
December 10, 2018 Order for the purposes of this instant Order.
For the reasons explained in this Court’s March 28, 2018 Order,
the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals’ December 10, 2018 Order, and
above, this Court finds that Carter has failed to demonstrate
extraordinary circumstances under Rule 60(b) for relief from
judgment. Carter’s motion for relief from judgment is therefore
DENIED, and the complaint is dismissed without prejudice.

2

SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 21, 2019

s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that this Order was electronically filed, and the
parties and/or counsel of record were served on February 21, 2019.
s/A. Chubb
Case Manager

3