Everson D. Smith v. Alumax Extrusions, Inc. And Local No. 204, Aluminum, Brick & Glass Workers International Union

How courts have described this case

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

• remanding the case to the district court to rule on contentions in the Rule 59(e) motion it had previously not addressed
• affirming the district court’s ruling that being unaware of “pending summary judgment motions” did not constitute excusable neglect
• remanding a case on the basis of a Rule 59(e) motion for the purpose of allowing the district court to rule on contentions it had previously failed to address
• remanding the plaintiff’s claim to the district court for ruling on the plaintiff’s Rule 59(e) motion, because the district court did not consider the Rule 59(e) motion after granting summary judgment to the defendants

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).