Dempsey v. White

• Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
• Decided: June 14, 1993
• Docket: 93-1164
• Status: Published

Opinion

USCA1 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                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]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 -