Spates-Moore

Spates-Moore v. Henderson

Good Law
305 F. App'x 449
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 29, 2008No. 05-55855California595 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Valerie Spates-Moore was employed as a postal carrier at the U.S. Post Office in Huntington Beach, California. In 2001 and 2003, she brought a total of three lawsuits against the U.S. Postmaster General and several individual Post Office employees. In late 2004, Spates-Moore’s attorney, Arthur Cooper, failed to file an opposition to a summary judgment motion, and the court granted summary judgment to the defendants, based on the non-opposition. Seventy-one days later, Spates-Moore sought relief from the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The court denied the 60(b) motion.

“The district court’s decision to deny a Rule 60(b) motion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.” Comty. Dental Servs. v. Tani, 282 F.3d 1164 , 1167 n. 7 (9th Cir.2002). “[W]here the client has demonstrated gross negligence on the part of his counsel, a default judgment against the client may be set aside pursuant to Rule 60(b)(6).” Id. at 1169 . Spates-Moore’s attorney moved for Rule 60(b) relief on the basis of subsection (3), fraud, and subsection (4), lack of due process, but failed to raise subsection (6), gross negligence. In McKinney v. Boyle, 404 F.2d 632 (9th…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.