From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gadsden v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jun 18, 2010
381 F. App'x 70 (2d Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 09-4577-cv.

June 18, 2010.

Appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Robinson, J.).

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the order of the district court be AFFIRMED. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

Norma Evans-Gadsden, pro se, Mount Vernon, NY, for Appellant.

John P. Keil, Rebecca G. Fischer, Collazo Florentino Keil LLP, New York, NY, for Appellees.

PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, Chief Judge, AMALYA L. KEARSE, PIERRE N. LEVAL, Circuit Judges.


SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Norma Evans-Gadsden, pro se, appeals the district court's postjudgment order denying her motion for reconsideration of a June 2007 order of the district court. That June 2007 order granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied Evans-Gadsden's cross-motion for summary judgment. Evans-Gadsden has also filed a motion with this Court, asking us to compel defendants to answer an interrogatory.

This Court reviews rulings on Rule 60(b) motions for abuse of discretion. See Transaero, Inc. v. La Fuerza Aerea Boliviano, 162 F.3d 724, 729 (2d Cir. 1998). "A district court would necessarily abuse its discretion if it based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law or on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence." Id.

Here, the district court correctly determined that Evans-Gadsden's motion for reconsideration, alleging that her adversary had "perpetrated fraud and forgery during the discovery phase of [the] litigation," was untimely. The motion was brought more than two years after the judgment See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(c); Warren v. Garvin, 219 F.3d 111, 114 (2d Cir. 2000) (holding the one-year limitations period under Rule 60(e) is "absolute"); see also King v. First Am. Investigations, Inc., 287 F.3d 91, 94 (2d Cir. 2002) (holding that appeal does not toll the one-year limitations period for filing a Rule 60(b) motion).

We have considered all of Evans-Gadsden's arguments on appeal and find them to be without merit.

Accordingly, the order of the district court is AFFIRMED and the motion is DENIED.


Summaries of

Gadsden v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jun 18, 2010
381 F. App'x 70 (2d Cir. 2010)
Case details for

Gadsden v. Bernstein Litowitz Berger

Case Details

Full title:Norma Evans GADSDEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Jun 18, 2010

Citations

381 F. App'x 70 (2d Cir. 2010)