F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
OCT 13 1999
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
BOLA AJIWOJU,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. No. 99-3213
JAMES KUNCE, (D.C. No. CV-98-2315-KHV)
(D. Kan.)
Defendant-Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, BALDOCK, and HENRY, Circuit Judges. **
Plaintiff Bola Ajiwoju appeals the district court’s granting of summary
judgment for Defendant James Kunce. On appeal, Plaintiff claims that the district
court did not fully consider his malpractice and misrepresentation claims against
Defendant. Defendant represented Plaintiff in his discrimination and retaliation
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
**
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has
determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the
determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(c); 10th Cir. R.
34.1(G). This case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
suit against his former employer, the Housing Authority of Kansas City, Kansas.
Defendant voluntarily dismissed the suit from federal district court; the state
district court granted summary judgment for the Housing Authority. Plaintiff
claims that Defendant’s alleged ties to the state district court judge and the
Housing Authority created a conflict of interest and caused Defendant to breach
his duty of confidentiality to Plaintiff. In the malpractice and misrepresentation
action, Plaintiff failed to respond to Defendant’s requests for admissions and
failed to adequately respond to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
Accordingly, the district court granted Defendant’s motion for summary
judgment.
We have thoroughly reviewed the parties’ briefs, the district court’s orders,
and the entire record before us. We affirm substantially for the reasons stated in
the district court’s Memorandum and Order dated June 16, 1999. Plaintiff’s
motion to set aside the district court’s judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) is
DENIED as moot. The decision of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court,
Bobby R. Baldock
Circuit Judge
-2-