Kehl v. LeBlanc

── Kehl v. LeBlanc ── Case No.: 25-4042 Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: April 02, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 25-4042 Document: 37-1 Date Filed: 04/02/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 2, 2026 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court NAOMI KEHL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. No. 25-4042 (D.C. No. 2:23-CV-00167-DBB) TONY LEBLANC; WESTMINSTER (D. Utah) COLLEGE, Defendants - Appellees. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _________________________________ Before PHILLIPS, EID, and FEDERICO, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Appellant Naomi Kehl sued her former college and college soccer coach alleging Title IX, Fourteenth Amendment, and various state law claims. While the case was pending, Ms. Kehl’s attorneys withdrew. The district court then provided Ms. Kehl with time to have a new attorney enter an appearance or to appear on her own behalf. Ms. Kehl never responded. The district court dismissed the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Thirty-seven days later, Ms. Kehl moved to After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined * unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.  Appellate Case: 25-4042 Document: 37-1 Date Filed: 04/02/2026 Page: 2 vacate the dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). The district court denied the motion, and Ms. Kehl appealed. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. I. Background In March 2023, Ms. Kehl hired Lento Law Group, P.C., (Lento Law) to sue Tony LeBlanc and Westminster College (the Defendants). Joseph Cannizzo, Jr., and Samuel Rocereta of Lento Law, and Hillary M. Nappi of Hach Rose Schirripa & Cheverie, LLP represented her. The local rules required local counsel, and Mr. Rocereta performed that role. Mr. Cannizzo and Ms. Nappi were admitted pro hac vice. Nearly a year later, Mr. Rocereta withdrew as counsel. But local counsel was required, so the Defendants filed a motion for appointment of local counsel. In April 2024, the district court denied the Defendants’ motion and ordered a status report. Mr. Cannizzo and Ms. Nappi filed one, notifying the court they were in the process of retaining new local counsel. But then in July 2024, Mr. Cannizzo withdrew as counsel, and Ms. Nappi filed a motion to withdraw as counsel. Both Ms. Nappi and Mr. Cannizzo stated that Ms. Kehl wanted Lento Law to continue with her representation. The district court granted Ms. Nappi’s motion in August 2024 and provided Ms. Kehl twenty-one days to file a notice of appearance with new counsel or on her own behalf. She failed to file a notice. The Defendants then moved to dismiss the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute or follow a court order. On October 30,