Wolf v. City of Aberdeen
3:23-cv-05954
W.D. Wash.Jul 10, 2025Background
- Louis Aren Wolf, proceeding pro se, filed a lawsuit in October 2023 asserting Fourth Amendment violations and malicious prosecution by the City of Aberdeen and others.
- The district court dismissed Wolf’s Fourth Amendment claim as time-barred but allowed the malicious prosecution claim to proceed against some defendants.
- On February 19, 2025, the court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants on the remaining malicious prosecution claim.
- Wolf appealed the summary judgment decision to the Ninth Circuit and, while the appeal was pending, moved for an indicative ruling under Rule 62.1(a), essentially asking the district court to reconsider its judgment.
- Wolf’s motion did not expressly invoke Rule 60(b), but the court liberally construed his request as a motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b), since he referenced claims of procedural error in his appeal brief.
- The court declined to grant relief, finding Wolf failed to demonstrate any grounds under Rule 60(b), including the catchall provision for extraordinary circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Relief from Judgment under Rule 60(b) | Wolf argued the court improperly directed him not to file discovery evidence, impairing his ability to oppose summary judgment; requested the summary judgment be reversed. | Defendants maintained there was no procedural error or grounds for relief under Rule 60(b). | Court found Wolf offered no factual support for the alleged error; denied relief. |
| Indicative Ruling under Rule 62.1(a) | Wolf sought an indicative ruling that there were grounds to reconsider the judgment if remanded by the appeals court. | Defendants argued no substantial issue warranted such a ruling. | Court found insufficient basis to grant, defer, or state it would grant such a motion; motion denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007) (documents filed pro se are to be liberally construed)
- United States v. Sparks, 685 F.2d 1128 (9th Cir. 1982) (Rule 60(b)(6) is reserved for extraordinary circumstances)