Johnson v. University of Rochester Medical Center

Summary

The Second Circuit dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction Johnson's appeal from the judgment dismissing his qui tam complaint and denying leave to amend because his notice of appeal was untimely. The court affirmed the denial of Rule 60(b)(1) relief and the imposition of sanctions against Johnson's attorney under 28 U.S.C. § 1927.

Holdings

1. The appeal from the February 19, 2010 judgment and order was untimely because Johnson filed his Rule 60(b) motion three days after the twenty-eight-day period that would have tolled the time to appeal; therefore, the Second Circuit lacked appellate jurisdiction over that portion of the appeal.
2. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Johnson's Rule 60(b)(1) motion because Johnson asked for leave to amend rather than asserting a right to amend as a matter of course, and the district court therefore did not make a mistake by exercising discretion over the request.
3. The district court did not abuse its discretion in sanctioning Johnson's attorney under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 because it reasonably found that counsel pursued claims known to lack a basis in law or fact and acted in bad faith after notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Second Circuit had appellate jurisdiction over Johnson's appeal from the judgment dismissing his complaint and denying leave to amend when his Rule 60(b) motion was filed three days after the twenty-eight-day tolling deadline.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Johnson's Rule 60(b)(1) motion seeking reconsideration of the denial of leave to amend.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion by imposing sanctions on Johnson's attorney under 28 U.S.C. § 1927.

Disposition

other