Darllel Orr v. Cynthia Davis, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio denied Darllel Orr’s motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The court held that Orr’s allegations concerning the investigation and weighing of evidence by a prison Rules Infraction Board did not establish fraud on the court, mistake, or another basis for relief. The court also certified that an appeal could not be taken in good faith.

Holdings

1. Rule 60(b)(3) addresses fraud on the court in the litigation process, not alleged fraud or evidentiary misconduct occurring between the parties before or during the underlying dispute. Orr therefore failed to establish a basis for relief under Rule 60(b)(3).
2. Orr was not entitled to relief under Rule 60(b)(1) because he did not identify a substantive error of law or fact in the prior dismissal.
3. A district court may not review a prison disciplinary committee's resolution of factual disputes or redetermine an inmate's guilt or innocence; the relevant inquiry is whether the disciplinary hearing satisfied basic due-process requirements.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Orr was entitled to relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(3) based on alleged fraud in the prison investigation and disciplinary decision.
2. Whether Orr was entitled to relief under Rule 60(b)(1) because the district court dismissed the action without allowing discovery.
3. Whether the district court could reconsider the merits of the prison disciplinary finding or reweigh the evidence through a Rule 60(b) motion.

Disposition

dismissed