Joan M. Canfield v. Van Atta Buick/gmc Truck, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, as a general matter, a mistake of law does not constitute excusable neglect.
• holding that “failure to follow the clear dictates of a court rule will generally not constitute such excusable neglect”
• holding not clearly erroneous the district court’s decision that a lawyer’s failure to file motion papers within the time limit established by a local rule was not excusable neglect under Rule 60(b)
• holding not clearly erroneous the district court's decision that a lawyer's failure to file motion papers within the time limit established by a local rule was not excusable neglect under Rule 60(b)
• observing that “inadvertence, ignorance of the rules, or mistakes construing the rules 5 do not usually constitute excusable neglect” (quotation marks omitted)
• observing that “inadvertence, ignorance of the rules, or mistakes construing the rules do not usually constitute excusable neglect” (internal quotation marks and emphasis omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).