FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT Se pt e m be r 29, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 12102 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 02 -015 24 -C V -J E C -1 R O D E R I C K O . S O L O M O N , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s D E K A L B C O U N T Y , G E O R G I A , T H O M A S E . B R O W N , JR . , In d i v i d u al l y an d i n H i s O ffi ci al C ap aci ty as D i rect o r o f P u b l i c S afety o f D e K a lb C o u n ty , G e o r g ia , e t a l., D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( S e pt e m be r29, 2005) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d D U B IN A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

A ppe l l a ntR ode r i c k O . S ol om on, pr oc e e di ng p ro se , appeal s the di stri ct c ourt ’ s or de rde ny i ng S ol om on’ s F e d. R . C i v. P . 60( b) a nd 60( b) ( 3) m ot i ons f or r e lie f f r o m th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s g r a n t o f s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t in f a v o ro f D e K a lb C o u n ty , G e o r g ia ; T h o m a s E . B r o w n , J r ., D ir e c to ro f P u b lic S a f

e ty o f D e K a lb Co u n ty ; Ro b e rtT. Bu r g e s s , Sr . , De Ka l b Co u n ty Po l i c e Ch i e f ; Of f i c e rM i c h a e l E. H annah, D eK al b C ou nty P ol i ce ; and Joh n D oes 1-3, D eK al b C ou nty P ol i ce O f f ic e r s ( c o lle c tiv e ly r e f

e rr e d to a s “D e K a lb d e f e n d a n ts ” ) ; a n d S E D I n te rn a tio n a l, I n c . ; M a rkDe v i t o ; an d J o n a th a n El s t e r( c o l l e c t i v e l y r e f e rr e d t o a s “ SE D de f e nda nt s ” ) ( a l l de f

e nda nt s c ol l e c t i ve l y r e f

e rr e d t o a s “ D e f

e nda nt s ” ) . S ol om on f i l e d R ul e 60( b) a nd 60( b) ( 3) m ot i ons i n the di s tr i c tc ourta f t e rs um m a ry j udgm e nt w a s a w a r d e d to th e D e f e n d a n ts o n a ll c o u n ts in h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 a n d s ta te causes of ac t i on sui t , ori gi nal l y f i l ed i n st at e c ou rtand rem ov ed t o the di stri ctcourt b y th e D efen d an t s. I. S ol om on a r gue s tha the i s e nt i t l e d t o R ul e 60( b) r e l i e f due t o the e xi s t e nc e of c r e d ib le e v id e n c e o f

p o lic e m is c o n d u c t a n d b a d f a ith .

“ [ A ] di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de runde rR ul e 60( b) i s r e vi e w abl e onl y f orabus e of di sc re t i on . ” A m . B anke rs I ns . C o. of

Flor i da v . N

or thw e s te rn N

at ’ l I ns . C o. , 198 F .3 d 1 3 3 2 , 1 3 3 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) . R u le 6 0 ( b ) p r o v id e s th a t3

the [ di s tr i c t ] c ourt m a y r e l i e ve a party or a party ’ s l eg al rep res e nt a t i ve fro m a fi n al j u d g m en t , o rd er, o r p ro ceed i n g fo r th e fo l l o w i n g re a s o n s: ( 1 ) m is ta k e , in a d v e rte n c e , s u rp r is e , o re x c u s ab le n e g le c t; ( 2 ) n e w ly di sc ov er ed evi dence w hi ch by du e di l i gence coul d n othave been di s c ove r e d i n t i m e t o m ove f orane w tr i a l und er R ul e 59( b) ; ( 3) f r aud (w he t he r he r e t ofor e de no mi na t e d i nt r i ns i c or e xt ri nsi c) , m i s r e pr e s e nt a t i on, orothe rm i s c onduc tof a n a dve r s e pa rty ; ( 4) the j u d g m en ti s voi d; ( 5) the j udgm e ntha s be e n s a t i s f i e d, r e l e a s e d, or di sc harged, or a pri or j ud gm entup on w h ich iti s bas ed has been r e ve r s e d orothe rw i s e va c a t ed , o r i t i s no l onge re qui t abl e tha tthe j udgm e nts houl d ha ve pr os pe c t i ve appl i c a t i on; or( 6) an y othe rr e a s on ju s tif y in g r e lie f

f r o m th e o p e r a tio n o f

th e ju d g m e n t. F e d . R . C iv . P . 6 0 ( b ) . T hi s C ou rthas hel d that [ a ]n ap p e a l o f

aru lin g o n aR u le 6 0 ( b ) m o tio n , h o w e v e r , is n a rr o w in s c ope , ad d ressi ng onl y the pr opr i e ty of the de ni a l orgr a ntof

r e l i e f a nd d o es n o trai se is s u e s i n th e u n d erl yi n g j u d g m en tfo r rev i ew . B ecau se o f th is lim ita tio n , th e la w is c l e a rth a t R u le 6 0 ( b ) m a y n o t b e u s e d to chal l enge m i st akes of l aw w hi ch coul d h ave been ra i se d o n d i re ct ap p e a l. A m . B anke rs I

ns . C o. , 198 F . 3d a t1338 ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . “ R ul e 60( b) a nd the i nd ependentac t i on s i t s s avi ng s c l ause pres erves gi ve the courtthe po w ert o set asi d e a j u d g m en tw h o se i n t eg ri ty i s l ack i n g . W h atR u l e 6 0 (b ) an dth ese i n d ep en d en tact i o n s do not prov i de i s am eans for l i t i gant s t o o bt ai n the di stri ct c o u rt’s r e c o n s id e r a tio n o f th e c la im s a n d d e f

e n s e s its ju d g m e n t a d

ju d ic a te d .” G onz alezv . Se c ’

y f orD e p’ t of C or r e c t i ons , 366 F . 3d 1253, 1295 ( 11th C i r . 2004) ( e n banc ) ( T

jo f la t, J ., c o n c u rr in g in p a rt, d is s e n tin g in p a rt) , cert . g ra n ted i n p a rt ,4

1 2 5 S . C t. 9 6 1 ( 2 0 0 5 ) , cert . den i ed i n p a rt , 1 2 5 S . C t. 9 6 5 ( 2 0 0 5 ) , af f i rm e d on othe rgr ounds s ub nom . G onz alezv . Cr os by , __U. S. __ , 1 2 5 S. Ct . 2 6 4 1 , __L. E d. 2d __ ( 2005) ( e m pha s i s i n or i gi na l ) ( c i t i ng A m . B anke rs I ns . C o. , 19 8 F . 3d at 13 38 ). “ [R ] el i ef

un der thi s c l ause [60(b)(6)] i s an extra ordi naryre m edy w hi ch m a y b e in v o k e d o n ly u p o n as h o w in g o f e x c e p tio n a l c ir c u m s ta n c e s . T h e p a rty s e e ki ng r e l i e f

ha s the bur de n of

s how i ng tha tabs e nts uc h r e l i e f , a n ‘ e xtr e m e ’ a nd

‘ un expect ed’ hardshi p w i l l re sul t . ” G r i f f i n v . Sw i m - T

e c h C or p. , 722 F . 2d 677, 680 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 4 ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . A ft er rev i ew i n g th e reco rd , w e co n cl u d e th atth e d i stri ctco u rtd i d n o tab u se it s d iscr etio n b y d en yin g S o lo m o n ’s R u le 6 0 (b ) m o ti o n . T h e b u lko f S o lo m o n ’s a r gum e nti n hi s m ot i on i n the di s tr i c tc ourtw a s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d by grant i ng sum m ary j ud gm ent . T hese cont ent i on s are no tthe prop erfoun dat i on of a R ul e 60( b) m ot i on. S ol om on of f e r e d no ba s i s i n the di s tr i c tc ourtoron appe a l w hy he shou l d b e r el i eved from the di stri ctcourt ’ s j ud gm entor ho w , abse ntsuch re l i ef , “e x tr e m e ” o r“u n e x p e c te d ” h a r d s h ip w ill r e s u lt. I t is ap p a r e n t th a t S o lo m o n is a tte m p tin g to o b ta in th is c o u rt’s r e v ie w o f c la im s c o n ta in e d in h is ap p e a ls pr e vi ous l y di s m i s s e d by thi s c ourt . R ul e 60( b) i s s i m pl y notthe pr ope ra ve nue f or s uc h r e vi e w . T he r e f

or e , the di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on by de ny i ng th e m o tio n .5 II . S o lo m o n a r g u e s th a t th e D e K a lb d e f e n d a n ts ’ in c o m p le te r e s p o n s e s to h is i nt errogat ori es m er i tre l i ef un der R ul e 60(b)(3). H e c on t ends thatpo l i ce offi ce rs lie d to th e s ta te m a g is tr a te r e g a r d in g f a c ts s u p p o rtin g S o lo m o n ’s a rr e s t w a rr a n t. H e s u b m its th a t e v id e n c e c o n tr a d ic ts th e s ta te m e n ts o f D e K a lb d e f

e n d a n ts a t h is st at e pre l i m i naryhear i ng . H e a ss ert s thatthe D eK al b d ef endant s c om m i tt ed d is c o v e ry ab u s e s w a rr a n tin g r e lie f . H e a r g u e s th a t th e S E D d e f e n d a n ts lie d a t h is st at e pre l i m i naryhear i ng t o fraud ul ent l y c re at e am ot i ve for hi s a ct i on s, w hi ch w a rr a n ts r e lie f

f o rf r au d o rm is r e p r e s e n ta tio n u n d e rR u le 6 0 ( b ) ( 3 ) .

“ [ A ] di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de runde rR ul e 60( b) i s r e vi e w abl e onl y f orabus e of di sc re t i on . ” A m . B anke rs I ns . C o. , 19 8 F . 3d at13 38 . R ul e 60(b)(3) provides re l i ef f r om f i na l j udgm e ntdue t o “ f

r aud ( w he the rhe r e t of

or e de nom i na t e d i ntr i ns i c or e x tr i n s i c ) , mi s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , o ro th e rmi s c o n d u c to f a n a d v e r s e p a rty . ” Fe d . R. C iv . P . 6 0 ( b ) ( 3 ) . “T o o b ta in r e lie f

f r o m af in a l ju d g m e n t b a s e d u p o n f r au d u n d e rR u le 60( b) ( 3) , the m ovi ng pa rty m us tpr ove by c l e a ra nd c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e tha tthe advers e party obt ai ned the verdi ctthrou gh fr aud, m i sr epre se nt at i on s, or other m i sc on du ct . T he m ov i ng party m ustal so dem on stra t e thatthe cond uctprevent ed them fr om ful l y pre se nt i ng hi s c as e. ” W addel l v. H endry C ou nt

y Sheri f f’s O f f i ce ,6

329 F . 3d 1300, 1309 ( 11th C i r . 2003) ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . W he n apa rty know s of evi dence butchoo se s nott o p re se nti tor se ek addi t i on al di sc ov ery f or further i nv es t i gat i on , thatparty i s notent i t l ed t o R ul e 60(b) rel i ef fol l ow i ng sum m ary ju d g m e n t. See i d. a t1310. W e c o n c lu d e f

r o m th e r e c o r d th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t ab u s e its di s c r e t i on by de ny i ng S ol om on’ s R ul e 60( b) ( 3) m ot i on. A l though S ol om on a l l e ge s tha tva r i ous pa rt i e s m i s r e pr e s e nt e d f a c t s a the a r i ngs a nd de pos i t i ons a nd c om m i tt e d di s c ove ry abus e s , he f a i l s t o s e touthi s a l l e ga t i ons w i th s pe c i f i c i ty or by cl ear and conv i nci ng evi dence. F urther, even as sum i ng thatS ol om on had de m ons tr a t e d hi s c l a i m s by c l e a ra nd c onvi nc i ng e vi de nc e , he doe s nots how how s uc h c onduc tpr e ve nt e d hi m f r om f ul l y pr e s e nt i ng hi s c a s e . S ol om on ha s not pr ovi de d a ny r e a s on w hy he c oul d notordi d notpr ovi de the e vi de nc e of w hi c h he c o m p la in s to th e d is tr ic t c o u rt. T h e r e f o r e , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t ab u s e its di s c r e t i on by de ny i ng the m ot i on. F orthe f or e goi ng r e a s ons , w e a f f i rm the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de rde ny i ng S o l o m o n ’ s R u l e 6 0 (b ) m o t i o n s. AF F I RME D.