WILLIAMS v. CITY OF AUSTIN (2018)

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Blayne D. WILLIAMS, Sr. Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF AUSTIN; Austin Police Department; Margo Frasier, in her official and individual capacities; Fred Fletcher, in his official capacity; Art Acevedo, in his official and individual capacities; John Doe; Jane Doe; Austin Police Department - Art Acevedo, in his official and individual capacities; Chattanooga Police Department; Fred Fletcher, in his individual capacity Defendants-Appellees

No. 18-50344

Decided: November 20, 2018

Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.

Blayne D. Williams, Sr., Pro Se Meghan Lee Riley, Paul Matula, City of Austin, Law Department, Litigation Division, Austin, TX, for Defendants - Appellees City of Austin, Austin Police Department, Margo Frasier, Art Acevedo, Fred Fletcher Phillip A. Noblett, Chattanooga City Attorney's Office, Chattanooga, TN, for Defendants - Appellees Fred Fletcher, Chattanooga Police Department

Plaintiff-Appellant, Blayne D. Williams, Sr., proceeding pro se, is before us for the second time in this case, now under Rule 60(b). This time he seeks to overturn the district court's March 2018 Order denying his Motion for Relief from Judgment. At the core of both of Williams's appeals has been the rejection of his contention that the statute of limitations should not have been employed to dismiss his lawsuit because of the “Continuous Violations Doctrine” which prevents application of the time bar.

We have reviewed the record on appeal, including the briefs of the parties and the district court's March 26, 2018 Order denying Williams's Motion for Relief from Judgment, and we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying that motion or in any other way. The abovesaid Order is, therefore, AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law