469 F. App'x 467
6th Cir.2012Background
- Plaintiffs Taylor and Bonnell appeal a district court order denying their Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment after summary judgment for defendants under §1983, §1985, and Ohio torts.
- The district court granted summary judgment to Chief Streicher, Lt. Col. Smith, Lt. Col. Biehl, Capt. Ratliff, Spec. O’Brien, Sgt. Thomas, and the City of Cincinnati.
- Plaintiffs rely on a grand jury transcript from O’Brien (newly alleged) and his deposition to claim fraud on the court and new evidence affecting malicious prosecution.
- This court previously affirmed the district court’s summary-judgment order (No. 10-3894).
- Plaintiffs contest under Rule 60(b)(2), (3), and (6), asserting the grand jury transcript is new evidence and that O’Brien’s testimony constitutes fraud on the court.
- The panel affirms the district court’s denial of Rule 60(b) relief and declines to strike the defendants’ appellate brief as moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Rule 60(b)(2) motion was properly denied as newly discovered evidence | O’Brien’s grand jury transcript is new evidence. | Transcript is not newly discovered; it was recorded in 2001 and action filed in 2007. | Denied; not newly discovered evidence. |
| Whether Rule 60(b)(3) relief is warranted for fraud on the court | O’Brien’s false testimony amounts to fraud on the court affecting malicious-prosecution claim. | Prosecutor, not O’Brien, decided to prosecute; testimony is immaterial to the ruling. | Denied; no fraud on the court. |
| Whether Rule 60(b)(6) limits relief to extraordinary circumstances | O’Brien’s allegedly false testimony requires relief in the interest of justice. | No compelling extraordinary justification; reassertion of fraud-on-the-court claim. | Denied; not extraordinary relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Good v. Ohio Edison Co., 149 F.3d 413 (6th Cir. 1998) (new evidence must be material, controlling, and could change outcome; due diligence required)
- Olle v. Henry & Wright Corp., 910 F.2d 357 (6th Cir. 1990) (Rule 60(b)(6) exceptional-circumstances relief)
- Hopper v. Euclid Manor Nursing Home, Inc., 867 F.2d 291 (6th Cir. 1989) (Rule 60(b)(6) relief requires equity-based justification)