# Spence v. Spence

> District Court, E.D. North Carolina · June 21, 2021

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10251596

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. North Carolina
- **Decided:** June 21, 2021
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10251596

## Opinion text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 5:17-CV-272-D

KIMBERLY T. SPENCE, and )
WILLIAM M. WINDSOR, )
Plaintiffs,
v. ORDER
CARL J. WILLIS, I,
Defendant.

On December 18, 2017, this court dismissed Kimberly T. Spence and William M. Windsor’s
claims and closed the case. See [D.E. 20]. On February 26, 2018, plaintiff Spence (“Spence”)
appealed [D.E. 22]. On May 4, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
dismissed the appeal. See Spence v. Willis, 721 F. App’x 290, 291 (4th Cir. 2018) (per curiam)
(unpublished); [D.E. 24]. On July 10, 2018, Spence filed another notice of appeal [D.E. 30]. On
January 17, 2019, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal. See Spence v. Willis, 748 F. App’x 510,
510-11 (4th Cir. 2019) (per curiam) (unpublished); [D.E. 35]. On October 10, 2019, Spence filed
another notice of appeal and asked to reopen the case [D.E. 39]. On October 17, 2019, the Fourth
Circuit denied the motion to reopen the case. See Spence v. Willis, No. 18-1790 (4th Cir. Oct. 17,
2019) [Doc. 105].
On May 7, 18, and 21, 2021, Spence moved to reopen the case [D.E. 55, 56, 57]. To the
extent Spence seeks reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59, the motion is
untimely. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e); cf. Zinkand v. Brown, 478 F.3d 634, 637 (4th Cir. 2007);
Bogart v. Chapell, 396 F.3d 548, 555 (4th Cir. 2005); Pac. Ins. Co. v. Am. Nat'l Fire Ins. Co., 148

F.3d 396, 403 (4th Cir. 1998); Hughes v. Bedsole, 48 F.3d 1376, 1382 (4th Cir. 1995).
To the extent Spence seeks relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), the court
denies the motion as baseless. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b); Aikens v. Ingram, 652 F.3d 496, 500-01
(4th Cir. 201 1) (en banc); Robinson v. Wix Filtration Corp. LLC, 599 F.3d 403, 412 n.12 (4th
Cir. 2010); Nat’ Credit Union Admin. Bd. v. Gray, 1 F.3d 262, 264 (4th Cir. 1993); cf. Luxama v.
McHugh, 675 F. App’x 272, 273 (4th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (unpublished).
The court DENIES as baseless plaintiff's motions to reopen the case [D.E. 55, 56, 57]. The
case remains closed.
SO ORDERED. This _!€ day of June 2021.

<4 . A anv UU
J S C. DEVER II
United States District Judge ‘

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10251596. Public record. Not legal advice.