N.D. California· 11/19/1991
Mateo v. M/S KISO
Citations
- 805 F. Supp. 761
- 1992 WL 277340
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[D]istrict courts are 7 authorized to reconsider interlocutory orders at any time prior to final judgment, independently of 8 Rule 60(b)”
- “Rule 60(b) motions apply only to final judgments, however, and not to interlocutory 23 rulings.”
- “Conclusory, speculative testimony 19 is insufficient to raise genuine issues of fact . . . .”
- ‘To succeed on . . . a motion to reconsider, || a party “must set forth facts or law of a strongly convincing nature to induce the court to reverse its prior decision.’” (citation omitted)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Jensen
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
26 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- McCoy v. MacOn Water AuthorityM.D. Georgia· 1997-06-16· cited 141×
- In re Conagra Foods, Inc.C.D. California· 2015-02-23· cited 74×
- I. Hyeon Su v. M/V Southern AsterNinth Circuit· 1992-10-14· cited 48×
- Mazur v. Ebay Inc.N.D. California· 2009-05-05· cited 40×
- Parker v. ArteryWyoming Supreme Court· 1995-02-09· cited 35×
- Davis v. LehaneD. Massachusetts· 2000-03-29· cited 30×
- Unnamed caseNinth Circuit· 1992-10-14· cited 26×
- Kamar v. Radio Shack Corp.C.D. California· 2008-10-08· cited 26×
- Lilly v. Jamba Juice Co.N.D. California· 2014-09-18· cited 26×
- Glavor v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc.N.D. California· 1994-12-06· cited 20×
- Doe v. KaradzicS.D. New York· 2000-03-27· cited 20×
- Sepulveda v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.C.D. California· 2006-05-05· cited 18×
- Porter v. NationsCredit Consumer Discount Co. (In Re Porter)E.D. Pennsylvania· 2003-06-19· cited 15×
- Breeden v. Benchmark Lending Group, Inc.N.D. California· 2005-07-13· cited 14×
- Maddock v. KB Homes, Inc.C.D. California· 2007-07-09· cited 13×
- Brink v. First Credit ResourcesD. Arizona· 1999-02-12· cited 12×
- In re Syncor Erisa LitigationC.D. California· 2005-03-28· cited 12×
- Mateo v. M/S KisoNinth Circuit· 1994-12-01· cited 8×
- Blackwell v. Skywest Airlines, Inc.S.D. California· 2007-08-30· cited 7×
- Jose v. M/V FIR GROVED. Oregon· 1992-04-27· cited 6×
Other cases named Mateo v. M/S KISO
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.