From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Opiyo v. Boehm

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jun 21, 2017
Case No. 09-13609 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 21, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 09-13609

06-21-2017

FREDERICK O. OPIYO, Plaintiff, v. DEPUTY H. BOEHM, DEPUTY J. DARLING, and DEPUTY WEDGE, Defendants.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (DOC. 63)

Plaintiff moves the Court, "pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)," to "set aside Summary Judgment obtained on fabricated evidence." (Doc. 63 at PageID 603). It appears that plaintiff seeks relief from this Court's September 16, 2010 "Order Adopting in Part Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation." (Doc. 26). The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation was filed on July 7, 2010. (Doc. 25).

The Court may relieve a party from a final judgment for fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(3). A motion invoking Rule 60(b)(3) "must be made within a reasonable time," specifically, "no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order." Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1). Plaintiff's motion, however, was filed on June 7, 2017, nearly seven years after the summary judgment order was issued. Plaintiff attempts to avoid this time limit by moving for relief pursuant to Rule 60(d), which notes that Rule 60 "does not limit a court's power to. . . set aside a judgment for fraud on the court."

Plaintiff claims that defendant Boehm submitted fabricated evidence in support of the motion for summary judgment. Boehm relied on an affidavit of Nicholas Romzek, Jail Lieutenant for Sanilac County, stating that Sanilac County payroll records indicate that Boehm was not working on September 5, 2008. Plaintiff appears to complain that the Court relied on this affidavit, as opposed to relying on some other form of payroll evidence. Plaintiff's argument fails. Romzek's affidavit is sufficient and has not been impeached by plaintiff.

Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, therefore, is untimely and does not establish fraud on the Court. As such, plaintiff's motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 21, 2017

s/George Caram Steeh

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE


Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on

June 21, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail and also on

Frederick Opiyo #39194039, FCI Bastrop, P. O. Box 1010

Bastrop, TX 78602.


s/Barbara Radke

Deputy Clerk


Summaries of

Opiyo v. Boehm

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jun 21, 2017
Case No. 09-13609 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 21, 2017)
Case details for

Opiyo v. Boehm

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK O. OPIYO, Plaintiff, v. DEPUTY H. BOEHM, DEPUTY J. DARLING, and…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Jun 21, 2017

Citations

Case No. 09-13609 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 21, 2017)