Seventh Circuit· 8/17/2009

Eskridge v. Cook County

Citations

577 F.3d 806
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 18254
2009 WL 2487095

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that deliberate choice to litigate in state rather than federal court was not “neglect” under Rule 60(b)
reasoning that reviving a dismissed case because of an attorney’s mistake “would only shift the burden” of error to the court and the defendant
reasoning that reviving a dismissed case because of an attorney’s mistake “would only shift the burden” of error to the court and the defendant
affirming the denial of Rule 60(b) relief where plaintiffs “explicitly asked for a voluntary dismissal”; having made that request deliberately, plaintiffs “could not claim that this dismissal resulted from ‘mistake’ or ‘inadvertence’”
noting that relief from judgment is “extraordinary remedy”
The test is “not whether the district court might have decided differently, but whether the court’s denial of the … Rule 60(b) motion was unreasonable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Evans, Williams, Tinder

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

44 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.