Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40130/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40130-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 17, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-41490

Summary Calendar

 

KINGS A. KOMOLAFE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

WILLIAM DEWEASE,

Defendant-Appellee.

--------------------

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:01-CV-420

--------------------

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Kings A. Komolafe, Texas prisoner # 601354, appeals from the

district court’s denial of his post-judgment motion for a new

trial and/or for relief from judgment brought under Rules

59(a)(1) and 60(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Komolafe does not argue that the district court erred in denying

his motion under Rule 59(a). Komolafe argues only that the

district court erred in failing to consider his post-judgment

 Case: 03-40130 Document: 0051318244 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2004
No. 02-41490

-2-

motion as a Rule 60(b) motion and his argument of fraud. Because

Komolafe filed his motion before the 10-day period following

entry of judgment for filing a Rule 59(a) motion had expired, his

motion fell under Rule 59 and the district court did not err in

treating his motion as a Rule 59 motion. See Teal v. Eagle

Fleet, Inc., 933 F.2d 341, 347 n.3 (5th Cir. 1991). Komolafe’s

motion to remand is DENIED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.

 Case: 03-40130 Document: 0051318244 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2004