From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

WATSON v. VEAL

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 4, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2672 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-2672 MCE EFB P.

January 4, 2008


ORDER


Plaintiff is a prisoner without counsel seeking relief for alleged civil rights violations. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 13, 2007, the court found that plaintiff failed to state a claim for relief for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and the Clerk of the Court duly entered judgment. Plaintiff seeks relief from judgment.

Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b):

On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or a party's legal representative from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.

In the amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that two nurses recommended that a physician increase plaintiff's "dry weight" from 72 kg to 75 kg, and that the physician ordered this increase without personally examining plaintiff. He alleges that as a result, he developed a build-up of fluid that caused him to cough hard enough to fracture a rib, and that he suffered heart damage such that he is not a good candidate for a kidney transplant. While it appeared that plaintiff stated a claim for medical malpractice, he did not state a claim that the nurses, doctor or warden were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. Plaintiff seeks relief from judgment on the ground that he finds it difficult to articulate his claims because he is uneducated, without counsel and has health problems. Plaintiff has not articulated any ground for vacating the judgment.

Accordingly, plaintiff's August 30, 2007, request is denied.

So ordered.


Summaries of

WATSON v. VEAL

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 4, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2672 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2008)
Case details for

WATSON v. VEAL

Case Details

Full title:JESSIE WATSON, Plaintiff, v. MARTIN VEAL, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 4, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-06-2672 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2008)