Skip to content
National Association of Attorneys General
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
      • Center for Consumer Protection
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • ConsumerResources.org
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us
National Association of Attorneys General
  • Find My AG
  • Consumer Complaints
  • Member Benefits
  • Contact Us
Log In
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
      • Center for Consumer Protection
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • ConsumerResources.org
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us

Supreme Court Report: Kemp v. United States, 21-5726

Home / Supreme Court / Supreme Court Report: Kemp v. United States, 21-5726
June 24, 2022 Supreme Court
Share this

  • Dan Schweitzer
    Director, Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
    National Association of Attorneys General

Volume 29, Issue 16

This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 13, 2022 (Part I).

Opinion: Kemp v. United States, 21-5726

Kemp v. United States, 21-5726. In an 8-1 decision, the Court held that the term “mistake” in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) includes a judge’s errors of law. Dexter Kemp and seven codefendants were convicted of various federal crimes. The Eleventh Circuit consolidated their appeals and affirmed the convictions in November 2013. Kemp did not seek rehearing or petition for certiorari, but two codefendants sought rehearing, which was denied in May 2014. In April 2015, Kemp moved to vacate his sentence. The Government argued that the motion was untimely because under 28 U.S.C. §2255 such motions must be filed within one year of the date on which the judgment becomes final, which is usually 90 days after the judgment is affirmed on appeal if the defendant does not petition for certiorari. The district court dismissed Kemp’s motion as untimely in September 2016, and Kemp did not appeal. In June 2018, Kemp sought relief under Rule 60(b). He correctly pointed out that the 90-day clock to determine finality of a judgment does not begin to run until all parties’ petitions for rehearing are denied. Since his codefendants’ petitions for rehearing were not denied until May 2014, his judgment was final in August 2014, and his April 2015 §2255 motion timely because it was filed within one year. The Government argued that Kemp’s 2018 Rule 60(b) motion itself was untimely because a claim of “mistake” under Rule 60(b)(1) is subject to a one-year limit under Rule 60(c)(1). Kemp argued that “mistake” does not include legal errors by a judge such as the timeliness issue here, and that the court should apply the catchall provision in Rule 60(b)(6)―which is not subject to a one-year limit―which permits reopening for “any other reason that justifies relief.” The district court and Eleventh Circuit concluded that Kemp’s 2018 motion alleged a “mistake” under Rule 60(b)(1) and was therefore untimely. The Court affirmed in an opinion by Justice Thomas.

The Court observed that the ordinary meaning of “mistake” includes a judge’s legal errors; a “mistake” is not generally limited to factual misunderstandings or non-judicial actors. The history of Rule 60(b) confirms this interpretation. When Rule 60(b)(1) was adopted, the difference between “mistake of fact” and “mistake of law” was well known, yet the drafters used the term “mistake” without qualification. When first adopted in 1938, the Rule referred to “his” mistakes, meaning mistakes by a party rather than a judge. In 1946, however, the word “his” was deleted, thereby removing any limitation on whose mistakes qualified. Thus, found the Court, “mistake” includes legal errors made by judges. The Court discounted the Government’s argument that the rule was limited to “obvious” mistakes. Although some courts have applied an “obviousness gloss,” neither the text nor history of the Rule limits it to “obvious” mistakes.

Based on this text and history, the Court rejected Kemp’s argument that Rule 60(b)(1) applies only to factual errors made by someone other than the judge. The Court also rejected Kemp’s argument that the other grounds for relief in Rule 60(b)(1)―“inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect”―involve non-legal and non-judicial errors, and that “mistake” should be interpreted similarly. Courts have long found that excusable neglect may involve legal error and that relief may be granted due to judicial inadvertence. The Court also rejected the argument that its interpretation would create confusing overlap with Rule 60(a), which authorizes courts to correct clerical mistakes, or Rules 60(b)(4) and (b)(5), which authorize relief from judgments that are void or lack legal effect. The Court was unpersuaded that its interpretation would allow litigants to “repackage” otherwise untimely claims as timely claims under Rule 60(b)(1); indeed, under Kemp’s interpretation, a party could repackage untimely claims as timely under Rule 60(b)(6). The Court was confident that Rule 60(c)’s requirement that all motions be made within a “reasonable time” suffices to forestall such abusive litigation tactics.

Justice Sotomayor concurred, writing separately to make two points. First, the Court did not alter the availability of Rule 60(b)(6) to reopen a judgment “in extraordinary circumstances, including a change in controlling law.” Second, she did not interpret the Court’s opinion as addressing Rule 60(c), which requires all Rule 60(b) motions to be made within a reasonable time.

Justice Gorsuch dissented, arguing that the writ of certiorari was improvidently granted. He opined that the difference between Rule 60(b)(1) and (b)(6) only matters in the rare circumstance when a losing party fails to appeal or secure relief under another rule, then files a Rule 60(b) motion more than a year later, yet still within a “reasonable” time. Justice Gorsuch noted that an alternative route exists to resolve any question about the Rule’s scope: Under the Rules Enabling Act, a committee may recommend any warranted clarifications to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Court may approve them. Thus, Kemp’s case did not meet the Court’s usual standards for review. On the merits, Justice Gorsuch criticized the Court for largely relying on the “mysterious” deletion of the word “his” in 1946, and for adopting a position on “obvious” error that neither party advanced.

Related Posts

Related Posts

Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 20

Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 13

Supreme Court Report, Volume 32, Issue 6

Connect with NAAG and the Attorney General Community

Create a NAAG account to subscribe to our newsletters or mailing lists.

Create Account
Subscribe
Marble columns and the top of a federal building

scroll to filters

White Logo for the National Association of Attorneys General

1850 M Street NW
12th floor
Washington, DC 20036

TEL 202-326-6000
EMAIL 

Youtube
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
      • Center for Consumer Protection
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • ConsumerResources.org
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us
  • Find My AG
  • Consumer Complaints
  • Member Benefits
  • Contact Us
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Privacy & Cookies Notice
  • Sitemap
  • Member Login

About the National Association of Attorneys General

As the nonpartisan national forum for America's state and territory attorneys general and their staff, NAAG provides collaboration, insight, and expertise to empower and champion America's attorneys general.
Learn More

© 2025 Copyright National Association of Attorneys General

Website by Yoko Co

Internal Feedback / Report an Error

Request an Update / Report an Error

The change you are requesting will be linked to this page. The URL for the page will be included in a hidden field when the form is submitted.
Please enter your change or describe your request. Be sure to reference where the error appears on the page and what needs to be done specifically.
Upload any files that need to be linked to this page. PDF only. Submit another request if you have more than five files to upload.
Drop files here or
Accepted file types: pdf, docx, xls, Max. file size: 50 MB, Max. files: 5.

    Who is requesting this change?(Required)

    Scroll To Top
    To provide you more clarity about how we collect, store and use personal information, and your rights to control that information, we have updated our privacy policy, which also explains how we use cookies. You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.I Agree