Kevin Kovacic and Tammy Kovacic, a/k/a Tammy Lively v. Oconto County

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin denied Kevin and Tammy Kovacic’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3) seeking relief from summary judgment and a final judgment entered after a jury verdict. The plaintiffs alleged that defendants engaged in fraud on the court through false reports, inconsistent testimony, altered deposition materials, and other misconduct. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to provide clear and convincing evidence of fraud or show that they were prevented from fully and fairly presenting their case.

Holdings

1. When an appeal is pending, a district court may entertain and deny a Rule 60 motion, but it may not grant the motion without a remand from the court of appeals.
2. A movant seeking relief under Rule 60(b)(3) must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the movant had a meritorious claim at trial, that the adverse party committed fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct, and that the misconduct prevented the movant from fully and fairly presenting the case.
3. Plaintiffs failed to establish fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct warranting vacatur of the summary judgment order or final judgment.
4. A Rule 60(b) motion should not be treated as a substitute for an appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiffs were entitled to relief from the prior summary judgment order or final judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3) based on alleged fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by defendants.
2. Whether the district court could deny a Rule 60(b) motion while an appeal was pending.
3. Whether the alleged mischaracterization of an item in Plaintiffs' vehicle, alleged testimonial inconsistencies, blog posts, and alleged deposition-transcript modification constituted fraud that prevented Plaintiffs from fully and fairly presenting their case.

Disposition

other