Voter v. Barker
Filing
35
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff's letter, which the court liberally construes as a motion for relief from judgment, is denied without prejudice to reassertion (Filing No. 34 .). The clerk's office is directed to send to Plaintiff a civil notice of appeal form and the affidavit accompanying a motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party with Forms)(TCL )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
RONALD VOTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
C.W BARKER,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 4:12CV3002
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s letter to the court filed on March 28,
2013, which the court liberally construes as a motion for relief from judgment filed pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). (Filing No. 34.)
The court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint on March 22, 2013, and entered judgment
against him. (Filing No. 32.) Liberally construed, Plaintiff seeks relief from the court’s
judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 60(b)(6). (Filing No. 34.) Rule 60(b)(6) “grants
federal courts broad authority to relieve a party from a final judgment ‘upon such terms as
are just,’ provided that the motion is made within a reasonable time and is not premised
on one of the grounds for relief enumerated in clauses (b)(1) through (b)(5).” Liljeberg v.
Health Serv. Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 863 (1988). However “[r]elief is available
under Rule 60(b)(6) only where exceptional circumstances have denied the moving party
a full and fair opportunity to litigate his claim and have prevented the moving party from
receiving adequate redress.” Harley v. Zoesch, 413 F.3d 866, 871 (8th Cir. 2005). Relief
under this rule is “exceedingly rare as relief requires an ‘intrusion into the sanctity of a final
judgment.’” In re: Guidant Corp. Implantable Defibrillators Prods. Liab. Litig., 496 F.3d 863,
868 (8th Cir.2007), (internal quotation marks omitted).
In Plaintiff’s letter, he states that he mailed to the court a response to Defendant’s
Motion for Summary Judgment on October 15, 2012, a document that the court did not
receive. (See Docket Sheet.) Though unclear, he appears to imply that the court did not
receive his response because of some interference by prison staff. Plaintiff did not set
forth why the court’s consideration of his response would have made any difference in the
outcome of the case. Moreover, Plaintiff’s motion is wholly unsupported by any facts. For
these reasons, the court finds that Plaintiff has not set forth any “exceptional
circumstances” that prevented him from fully litigating his claims or receiving adequate
redress. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s March 28, 2013, letter, which the court liberally construes
as a motion for relief from judgment, will be denied without prejudice to reassertion. Per
Plaintiff’s request in the letter, the court will direct the clerk’s office to mail to Plaintiff a civil
notice of appeal form and the affidavit accompanying a motion for permission to appeal in
forma pauperis.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Plaintiff’s letter, which the court liberally construes as a motion for relief from
judgment, is denied without prejudice to reassertion (Filing No. 34.); and
2.
The clerk’s office is directed to send to Plaintiff a civil notice of appeal form
and the affidavit accompanying a motion for permission to appeal in forma
pauperis.
DATED this 15th day of May, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S.
District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or
guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites.
Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites.
The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink.
Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does
not affect the opinion of the court.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?