United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana
HARRISON A. PARFAIT, JR.
MS. DOMINQUE, ET AL.
ORDER AND REASONS
S. VANCE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Harrison A. Parfait, Jr. moves for relief from
judgment. For the following reasons, the Court
denies the motion.
October 3, 2016, Parfait filed a complaint pro se
against Dominique Baio and Renee Lirette (identified as Ms.
Dominique and Ms. Renea in the complaint) in the Western
District of Louisiana. The case was transferred to this district
on January 30, 2017. Defendants are nurses at the Terrebonne
Parish Criminal Justice Complex. Parfait alleges that he
suffers from sleep apnea and needs to be treated with a CPAP
machine, or risks suffering a heart attack. According to
Parfait, he did not receive proper medical attention at the
Terrebonne Parish Criminal Justice Complex even though he
told defendants about his condition.
8, 2017, after the Court was notified that Parfait was no
longer incarcerated at the Terrebonne Parish Criminal Justice
Complex, the Magistrate Judge issued an order directing
Parfait to notify the Court of his current address by June 8,
2017. Parfait failed to do so, and the
Magistrate Judge recommended dismissing the complaint sua
sponte for failure to prosecute. The Court adopted the
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and
dismissed Parfait's complaint without prejudice on August
March 21, 2018, Parfait moved for relief from judgment under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).
district court has broad discretion to grant or deny a motion
under Rule 60(b). Lyles v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, USA,
Inc., 871 F.3d 305, 315 (5th Cir. 2017). Rule 60(b)
permits a court to grant relief from a final judgment or
order only upon a showing of one of the following:
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable
diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for
a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic),
misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(4) the judgment is void;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged;
it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or
vacated; or applying it ...