Parham v. Pepsico Inc ( 1998 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 98-1261
    KARON ANN PARHAM,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    PEPSICO, INCORPORATED,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
    trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis-
    trict Judge. (CA-95-307-5-BR)
    Submitted:   August 25, 1998              Decided:   November 23, 1998
    Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Karon Ann Parham, Appellant Pro Se. Louis B. Meyer, III, POYNER &
    SPRUILL, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Karon Ann Parham appeals the district court’s orders denying
    her motions to accept newly discovered evidence and for entry of
    default judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district
    court’s orders and find no reversible error. We affirm the denial
    of Parham’s motions because the motion to accept newly discovered
    evidence was untimely under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), and the district
    court lacked jurisdiction to reopen default judgment proceedings
    after entering final judgment. We deny Parham’s motion for oral
    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
    presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process. We deny Parham’s motions for sanctions,
    to produce evidence, and command attendance at hearing. We grant
    Pepsico’s second amended motion for sanctions under Fed. R. App. P.
    38 for filing a frivolous appeal, but decline to grant Pepsico’s
    request for an order enjoining Parham from filing any future
    actions against Pepsico in federal court. Instead of particularized
    fees and costs, we order Parham to pay sanctions in the amount of
    $500. See In re Vincent, 
    105 F.3d 943
    , 945 (4th Cir. 1997).
    AFFIRMED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 98-1261

Filed Date: 11/23/1998

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/31/2014