Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

State of ND v. Michael H. Nowik, 03-2705 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 03-2705 Visitors: 12
Filed: Nov. 25, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 03-2705 _ State of North Dakota, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District v. * of North Dakota. * Michael H. Nowik, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. * _ Submitted: November 21, 2003 Filed: November 25, 2003 _ Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Michael H. Nowik appeals the district court's* order denying Nowik's motions for reconsideration under Federal Rule
More
                     United States Court of Appeals
                           FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                    ___________

                                    No. 03-2705
                                    ___________

State of North Dakota,                   *
                                         *
                    Appellee,            * Appeal from the United States
                                         * District Court for the District
      v.                                 * of North Dakota.
                                         *
Michael H. Nowik,                        *      [UNPUBLISHED]
                                         *
                    Appellant.           *
                                    ___________

                              Submitted: November 21, 2003

                                   Filed: November 25, 2003
                                    ___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
                           ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Michael H. Nowik appeals the district court's* order denying Nowik's motions
for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and for default
judgment, both filed after the district court dismissed his purported removal of a state
court criminal action. We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in
denying either the Rule 60(b) motion, see Swope v. Siegel-Robert, Inc., 
243 F.3d 486
,
498 (8th Cir.) (Rule 60(b) motion must demonstrate exceptional circumstances for

      *
       The Honorable Daniel Hovland, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the District of North Dakota.
relief; reviewed for abuse of discretion), cert. denied, 
534 U.S. 887
(2001), or the
motion for default judgment. Accordingly, we affirm.
                       ______________________________




                                        -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer