Neldon Neal v. Jeremiah Nixon , 363 F. App'x 418 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 09-1560
    ___________
    Neldon Neal,                          *
    *
    Appellant,               *
    *
    v.                              * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    Jeremiah Nixon; Brenda Umstattd;      * Western District of Missouri.
    Paul Harper,                          *
    *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellees.               *
    ___________
    Submitted: January 22, 2010
    Filed: February 2, 2010
    ___________
    Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Missouri inmate Neldon Neal appeals the district court’s1 denial of his Fed. R.
    Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from judgment in his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     action.
    Notwithstanding Neal’s argument that he failed to litigate his case because he did not
    receive court documents during a nine-month stay in federal custody, we find no
    abuse of discretion in the court’s denial of his Rule 60(b) motion because nothing in
    the record shows that Neal notified the court of his custody change or otherwise
    1
    The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western
    District of Missouri.
    attempted to follow through with his case before he was returned to state custody. See
    Murphy v. Mo. Dep’t of Corr., 
    506 F.3d 1111
    , 1117 (8th Cir. 2007) (Rule 60(b)(6)
    relief is available only where exceptional circumstances have denied moving party full
    and fair opportunity to litigate claim and prevented moving party from receiving
    adequate redress); In re Guidant Corp. Implantable Defibrillators Prod. Liab. Litig.,
    
    496 F.3d 863
    , 866 (8th Cir. 2007) (setting forth relevant factors for finding excusable
    neglect under Rule 60(b)); see also Broadway v. Norris, 
    193 F.3d 987
    , 988-89 (8th
    Cir. 1999) (applying abuse-of-discretion review standard and noting that appeal of
    Rule 60(b) motion does not bring up for review underlying judgment or order).
    Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    _____________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-1560

Citation Numbers: 363 F. App'x 418

Filed Date: 2/2/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023