Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-20498/USCOURTS-ca5-15-20498-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Harris County Sheriff Department
Appellee
Samuel Mayo
Appellant
Pasadena Police Department
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-20498

Summary Calendar

SAMUEL MAYO, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

PASADENA POLICE DEPARTMENT; HARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF 

DEPARTMENT, 

 Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CV-3123

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Samuel Mayo seeks to revive his civil rights claims in this appeal of the 

district court’s Order denying his request for relief under Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 60(b). We have reviewed the record and briefs on appeal and affirm 

the district court’s Order.

 

* 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

FILED

March 14, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-20498 Document: 00513422541 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/14/2016
No. 15-20498

2

Rule 60(b) provides relief from a final judgment, order or proceeding in 

the event of mistake or misconduct, newly discovered evidence, fraud or other 

reasons that justify relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Mayo argues that he was 

denied such relief because the defendants and the district court committed

fraud, misrepresentation and misconduct. The evidence does not support his

contentions. Thus, the district court properly concluded that Mayo failed to 

clearly and convincingly establish the existence of fraud or other misconduct 

that prevented him from “fully and fairly presenting his case.” Gov’t Fin. 

Servs. One Ltd. P’ship v. Peyton Place, Inc., 62 F.3d 767, 772 (5th Cir. 1995).

Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion 

in denying Mayo’s request for relief.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-20498 Document: 00513422541 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/14/2016