Opinion

Stancliff v. Brown

  • 925 F.2d 1465
  • 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 16996
  • 1991 WL 16449
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Filed
Feb 12, 1991
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

925 F.2d 1465

Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.

Kathy STANCLIFF, Individually and doing business as The

King's Kids Academy, Donald Stancliff, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

Tina BROWN, Gloria Beattie, Denise Hobbs, Judy Clancey,

Sarah Hogan, Charles C. Thompson, Charlie West, Pat Holder,

Mr. Walker, Danny Wix, Jerry Ledsinger, Peggy Lynn, Betty

Taylor, Glen Simmons, Cindy Chattem, David Florence, Jessie

Campbell, Lyndie Hamilton, Melanie Hamilton, Louie Baldwin,

Carla Snodgrass, Charles Wilson, Michael Gilmer, William

Russell, L. Leonard Lewis, Nancy Min, John Doe, Jane Doe,

Tennessee Department of Human Services, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-6101.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Feb. 12, 1991.

1

Before RYAN and SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judges, and SILER, Chief District Judge. *

ORDER

2

Kathy and Donald Stancliff, pro se Tennessee plaintiffs, appeal from the district court's order denying their motion for relief from judgment filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). The case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the record and briefs, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

3

Seeking monetary, declaratory and injunctive relief, the Stancliffs sued various state and local Tennessee officials, alleging various violations of their constitutional rights. The district court granted the defendants summary judgment and dismissed the case. The Stancliffs did not appeal from this decision.

4

The Stancliffs subsequently filed a motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), requesting relief from judgment. The district court denied the Stancliffs' motion. The Stancliffs have filed a timely appeal. In their brief, they request the appointment of counsel and a transcript at government expense.

5

Upon review, we determine that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Stancliffs' Rule 60(b) motion. In re Salem Mortgage Co., 791 F.2d 456 , 459 (6th Cir.1986).

6

Accordingly, we deny counsel and transcript and affirm the district court's judgment. Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

*

The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, Jr., Chief District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.