Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

S.F.M. v. Gilmore

United States District Court, D. Kansas

August 20, 2019

S.F.M., a minor, by and through [his grandmother and next friend, TERRI E. BAKER, Plaintiff,
v.
PHYLLIS GILMORE in her official capacity as Secretary of the Kansas Department for Children and Families, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          CARLOS MURGUIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This matter is before the court on plaintiff's motion to vacate the court's order (Doc. 50) dismissing defendants, dismissing plaintiff's nonmonetary claims, and staying plaintiff's monetary claims. (Doc. 61.)

         I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff S.F.M. is the four-year-old grandson of his grandmother and next friend, Terri E. Baker. On October 2, 2017, plaintiff filed suit against defendants Phyllis Gilmore, in her official capacity, as Secretary for the Kansas Department for Children and Families (“KDCF”); Susan Mosier, in her official capacity, as Secretary for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (“KDHE”); KVC Behavioral Healthcare, Inc.; Saint Francis Community Services, Inc.; and multiple individual defendants. On March 29, 2018, the court granted motions to dismiss parties by defendants KDCF and KDHE, dismissed plaintiff's non-monetary claims against defendants Saint Francis and KVC, and stayed plaintiff's monetary claims against defendants Saint Francis and KVC. (Doc. 50.)

         Plaintiff now moves to vacate the court's order based on a change of circumstances because plaintiff was legally adopted by Terri and Linus Baker on July 10, 2019. Plaintiff argues that there remains a case and controversy with KDHE and plaintiff's public school, and that requiring plaintiff to file a new lawsuit would result in additional attorney's fees and costs. Plaintiff states that he will seek leave to amend to add Terri Baker individually, as a parent, if the court vacates.

         II. LEGAL STANDARDS

         Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) allows the court to “relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding” for six reasons:

(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 prospectively is no longer equitable; or
(6) any other reason that justifies ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.