Donna Thorn v. Megan Brennan
690 F. App'x 390
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Thorn, a USPS rural carrier, sued under the Rehabilitation Act, ADA, and Title VII alleging disability and gender discrimination and retaliation.
- The district court repeatedly extended discovery over three years but then set firm deadlines in June 2016 (dispositive motions July 1, 2016; trial Sept. 27, 2016) and warned no further extensions would be granted.
- Parties obtained additional extensions; Thorn failed to produce requested documents and left town the day before a noticed deposition, prompting judicial frustration.
- USPS filed a timely summary judgment motion on July 29, 2016; Thorn sought an extension to respond but missed the extended deadline and filed her response eight minutes after the court entered summary judgment.
- Thorn moved under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1) (excusable neglect) claiming counsel suffered computer problems; the district court found the excuse not credible, cited lack of diligence and prejudice to USPS, and denied relief.
- Thorn appealed; the Sixth Circuit reviewed denial of Rule 60(b) relief for abuse of discretion and affirmed, holding no excusable neglect and no basis for relief under Rule 60(b)(6).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel's late filing due to alleged computer problems constitutes excusable neglect under Rule 60(b)(1) | Thorn: computer problems prevented timely filing and warrant relief | USPS: no credible excuse; Thorn was repeatedly warned and delayed discovery; prejudice from delay | Denied — district court did not abuse discretion; excuse not credible, lack of diligence, prejudice to USPS |
| Whether the short delay (minutes) prejudiced USPS sufficiently to deny relief | Thorn: minimal delay (response minutes after judgment) makes relief appropriate | USPS: years of litigation and resources expended; summary judgment timely obtained after independent review | Denied — court weighed prejudice and found USPS would be prejudiced given history |
| Whether counsel’s conduct and timing show bad faith or weigh against relief | Thorn: acted in good faith attempting to file | USPS: pattern of tardiness and failure to comply with discovery; counsel waited until last second | Denied — district court found lack of diligence and insufficient good faith |
| Whether Rule 60(b)(6) provides relief for Thorn’s late filing | Thorn: Rule 60(b)(6) permits equitable relief for extraordinary circumstances | USPS: circumstances are ordinary and covered by Rule 60(b)(1) analysis; not extraordinary | Denied — not an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance justifying 60(b)(6) relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Yeschick v. Mineta, 675 F.3d 622 (6th Cir. 2012) (standard for reviewing denial of Rule 60(b) and factors for excusable neglect)
- In re Ferro Corp. Derivative Litig., 511 F.3d 611 (6th Cir. 2008) (definition of abuse of discretion)
- Jinks v. AlliedSignal, Inc., 250 F.3d 381 (6th Cir. 2001) (courts should not consider merits of underlying judgment when reviewing Rule 60(b) denial; excusable neglect factors)
- Burnley v. Bosch Ams. Corp., [citation="75 F. App'x 329"] (6th Cir. 2003) (prejudice to opposing party relevant in Rule 60(b) inquiry)
- Olle v. Henry & Wright Corp., 910 F.2d 357 (6th Cir. 1990) (Rule 60(b)(6) limited to exceptional and extraordinary circumstances)