Komolafe v. Dewease

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 17, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-41490
Summary Calendar
KINGS A. KOMOLAFE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM DEWEASE,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:01-CV-420
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kings A. Komolafe, Texas prisoner # 601354, appeals from the
district court’s denial of his post-judgment motion for a new
trial and/or for relief from judgment brought under Rules
59(a)(1) and 60(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Komolafe does not argue that the district court erred in denying
his motion under Rule 59(a). Komolafe argues only that the
district court erred in failing to consider his post-judgment

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-41490
-2-
motion as a Rule 60(b) motion and his argument of fraud. Because
Komolafe filed his motion before the 10-day period following
entry of judgment for filing a Rule 59(a) motion had expired, his
motion fell under Rule 59 and the district court did not err in
treating his motion as a Rule 59 motion. See Teal v. Eagle
Fleet, Inc., 933 F.2d 341, 347 n.3 (5th Cir. 1991). Komolafe’s
motion to remand is DENIED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --