Desmond Patrick Brendan Corr, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Gannett Pacific Corporation, Defendant-appellee, 85 F.3d 634 (9th Cir. 1996)

 Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 85 F.3d 634 (9th Cir. 1996) Submitted April 30, 1996. *Decided May 6, 1996

Before: BROWNING, REINHARDT and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Desmond Patrick Brendan Corr appeals pro se the district court's denial of his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider the court's dismissal of the civil rights action Corr and his wife Patricia filed against Gannett Pacific Corporation, owner of the Honolulu Advertiser.1  Corr contends Gannett improperly obtained judgment against him through mail fraud and misconduct. We conclude the district court properly determined (1) Corr was not entitled to relief from judgment due to fraud, see Luttrell v. United States, 644 F.2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1981); (2) amendment of the complaint would have been futile, Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987); and (3) denial of a default judgment was not error. See Draper v. Coombs, 792 F.2d 915, 925 (9th Cir. 1986).

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

 1

Corr's motion for reconsideration was not filed within 10 days as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), thus the district court properly treated his motion as one brought under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). See United States v. Nutri-Cology, Inc., 982 F.2d 394, 396-97 (9th Cir. 1992). Since a Rule 60(b) motion does not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal, and Corr's appeal was filed over 30 days after the district court's final judgment, we review only whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Corr's Rule 60(b) motion. See Floyd v. Laws, 929 F.2d 1390, 1400 (9th Cir. 1991); see also Vernon v. Heckler, 811 F.2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1987) (filing timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional)

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.