Noel Borrero v. City of Chicago

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that only a single, timely Rule 59(e) motion tolls the time to appeal from the judgment, because “[o]therwise a litigant could extend the time to appeal indefinitely simply by filing successive Rule 59(e) motions.”
• noting that Rule 59(e) applies when a plaintiff uses a synonym, such as “vacate,” to describe a motion
• explaining that judgment is final under § 1291 “if the district judge is finished with the case”
• clarifying that “the former approach—that, no matter what their substance, all post-judgment motions filed within [28] days of judgment would be considered as Rule 59(e) motions—no longer applies”
• clarifying that “the former approach-that, no matter what their substance, all post-judgment motions filed within [28] days of judgment would be considered as Rule 59(e) motions – no longer applies”
• clarifying that “the former approach-that, no matter what their substance, all post-judgment motions filed within [28] days of judgment would be considered as Rule 59(e) motions – no longer applies”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).