Jeffrey York, Cross-Appellant v. Arthur Tate, Cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he purpose of Rule 59 is to allow the district court to correct its own errors, sparing the parties and appellate courts the burden of unnecessary appellate proceedings.” (citations omitted)
• “[W]here, as here, the court grants a Rule 59(e) motion and significantly alters its prior judgment, we find that the federal rules do not prohibit the opposing party from filing a Rule 59(e
• finding reasoning of Charles court persuasive
• finding reasoning of Charles court persuasive

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).