Jackson v. Curry

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “courts are generally reluctant to recognize attorney error as a basis for relief from an order or judgment” under Rules 59(e) and 60(b)
• holding that when “a party promptly raises a colorable argument that his or her attorney lacked authority to settle or otherwise dismiss his or her claims, a factual dispute arises that must be resolved through an evidentiary hearing” (emphasis added)
• noting that courts usually do not disturb a judgment based upon counsel’s “mistake or omission”
• requiring only a “colorable argument that [the party’s] attorney lacked authority to settle” to necessitate resolution of the factual dispute through an evidentiary hearing
• noting exceptions for circumstances such as “an attorney’s disappearance or mental illness where the party tried diligently to contact his or her attorney”
• reviewing the district court’s refusal to grant a hearing for abuse of discretion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).