Dempsey v. White
Dempsey v. White
Opinion
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For The FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 93-1164 JOHN B. DEMPSEY, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. VANNA WHITE, Defendant, Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. A. David Mazzone, U.S. District Judge]
Before Torruella, Cyr and Boudin, Circuit Judges.
John B. Dempsey on brief pro se.
June 11, 1993
Per Curiam. The only question presented by this
appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in denying pro se appellant's motion under Fed. R. Civ. P.
60(b). See Duffy v. Clippinger, 857 F.2d 877, 879 (1st Cir.
1988). Appellant's allegations that he is entitled to relief from judgment because of excusable neglect, Rule 60(b)(1), and newly discovered evidence, Rule 60(b)(2), are frivolous.
It is clear that appellant's profferings - that he failed to cite certain statutes, propound certain theories, offer certain amendments, or refer to certain non-legal publications - are merely attempts to reargue the merits of his case. We affirmed the dismissal of appellant's complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). Dempsey v. White,
No. 91-1253, slip op. Mar. 29, 1991. There was no error of judgment on the part of the trial court.
Affirmed. Appellant's pending motion for a gag
order restraining order is denied.
- 2 -
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.