Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to reopen to take his testimony where the defendant failed to provide a reason why he failed to attend the trial
• concluding that a default judgment was “in fact … [an] entry of default” because the default judgment “expressly ordered that there be an inquest as to damages and indicated that only thereafter would a final judgment be entered”
• finding that there was “no question” that default was properly entered where corporate defendant failed to comply with the court's order to obtain new counsel
• finding that there was “no question” that default was properly entered where corporate defendant failed to comply with court’s order to obtain new counsel
• stating that “[a] finding that one defendant has acted in bad faith in conducting litigation does not justify an award of fees against a codefendant”
• noting that party challenging denial of an adjournment must establish that “it substantially impaired presentation of [the party’s] case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).