John Charles Middleton v. J.E. McDonald Clinton County Sheriff's Department

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a three-year delay was not reasonable for the purposes of Rule 60(c)
• analyzing whether mitigating circumstances existed to render the delay reasonable after determining petitioner’s Rule 60(b) motion was untimely
• analyzing whether mitigating circumstances existed to render the delay reasonable after determining petitioner’s Rule 60(b) motion was untimely
• holding three-year delay without mitigating circumstances was unreasonable
• holding a 3- year delay unreasonable
• affirming the district court’s denial of a Rule 60(b) motion premised on fraud or misconduct as untimely where it was filed more than one year after judgment was entered; stating, “Because the substance of Middleton’s Rule 60(b) motion is in reality grounded in subsection (3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).