Dominic M. Cavaliere v. Allstate Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that relief was unavailable under Rule 60(b)(6) for counsel’s mistaken interpretation of law because it “fit[ ] more naturally under Rule 60(b)(1)”
• stating that the court would consider only the denial of relief as to the Rule 60(b
• holding “a court cannot grant relief under (b)(6) for any reason which the court could consider under” any other 60(b) subsection
• holding that appellant who failed to meet both the 30-day deadline for timely notice of appeal and the second 30-day deadline for filing a motion for extension of time was not entitled to initiate the “excusable neglect or good cause” inquiry of Rule 4(a)(5
• holding that appellant who failed to meet both the 30-day deadline for timely notice of appeal and the second 30-day deadline for filing a motion for extension of time was not entitled to initiate the “excusable neglect or good cause” inquiry of Rule 4(a)(5
• holding that appellant who failed to meet both the 30-day deadline for timely notice of appeal and the second 30-day deadline for filing a motion for extension of time was not entitled to initiate the “excusable neglect or good cause” inquiry of Rule 4(a)(5

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).