Kam v. Peyton ( 2021 )

Case: 21-10127 Document: 00515913123 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/24/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 24, 2021
No. 21-10127 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
Carol M. Kam,
Plaintiff—Appellant,
versus
John B. Peyton, Jr.,
Defendant—Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:18-CV-1447
Before Clement, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
This is Carol Kam’s second appeal of the district court’s dismissal of
her claims against the state judge who presided over her brother’s probate.
This court previously affirmed the district court’s dismissal pursuant to the
Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Kam v. Peyton, 773 F. App’x 784 (5th Cir. 2019)
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-10127 Document: 00515913123 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/24/2021
No. 21-10127
(per curiam), cert. denied, 140 S. Ct. 494 (2019) (mem.). Kam then moved to
vacate the Rooker-Feldman dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
60(b). The district court denied Kam’s Rule 60(b) motion as untimely and
otherwise meritless. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c); Bailey v. Ryan Stevedoring
Co., 894 F.2d 157, 160 (5th Cir. 1990); Carter v. Dolce, 741 F.2d 758, 759 (5th
Cir. 1984). Kam filed this pro se appeal. Upon review of the party’s briefs,
the district court’s opinion, the applicable law, and the entire record, we
affirm for substantially the same reasons stated in the district court’s opinion
and order.
AFFIRMED.
2