United States District Court, D. Nebraska
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
RICHARD G. KOPF SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Robert Earl Clayborne, Jr., an inmate at the Tecumseh State
Correctional Institution (“TSCI”), filed this
§ 1983 action on May 28, 2015, seeking to recover
monetary damages from several prison officials for allegedly
violating Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights by failing
to protect his safety during a prison riot that occurred at
TSCI on May 10, 2015 (Filing No. 1). On August 12,
2016, Defendants moved for summary judgment on the basis of
qualified immunity (Filing No. 50). The motion was
granted by the court in a memorandum and order dated October
27, 2016 (Filing No. 57), and a final judgment
dismissing Plaintiff's action with prejudice was entered
that same day (Filing No. 58).
appealed to the Eighth Circuit, which affirmed this
court's judgment on November 1, 2017 (Filing Nos.
73, 74). The Court of Appeals issued its
mandate on November 28, 2017 (Filing No. 75).
Plaintiff then filed a petition for a writ of certiorari on
November 29, 2017 (Filing No. 76), which was denied
by the Supreme Court on May 14, 2018 (Filing No.
pending before the court are two motions that were filed by
Plaintiff on June 15, 2018: (1) a motion for relief from
judgment, pursuant to Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure (Filing No. 80); and (2) a motion for an
evidentiary hearing (Filing No. 79). Both motions
will be denied.
SUMMARY OF MOTIONS
claims he has newly discovered evidence in the form of a
log-in sheet that lists the names of TSCI staff members who
were on duty at the prison on May 10, 2015, between 2:00 pm
and 10:00 pm. Plaintiff states the log-in sheet was sent to
him by Defendants' attorney of record on July 12, 2016
(one month prior to the filing of Defendants' motion for
summary judgment). Plaintiff contends that because the log-in
sheet does not list the name of James Jensen, a non-party
TSCI employee who submitted an affidavit in support of
Defendants' motion for summary judgment, Defendants were
granted qualified immunity based on false statements.
Plaintiff requests an evidentiary hearing in order to prove
that the log-in sheet is newly discovered evidence. Plaintiff
states he is impaired by mental disorders, and has provided a
copy of a 2010 Social Security determination that he was then
disabled by reason of depression and disc disease.
provides, in relevant part:
(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or
Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may
relieve a party or its legal representative from a final
judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable
diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for
a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic),
misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; [or]
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.
(c) Timing and Effect of the Motion.
(1) Timing. A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within
a reasonable time-and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more
than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the
date of the proceeding.
* * *
(d) Other Powers to Grant Relief. This rule does
not limit a ...