Oliver T. Carr, Jr. v. District of Columbia, a Municipal Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “an appeal from the judgment [does not] have the effect of tolling or enlarging” the one-year limit established in Rule 60(c)(1)
• leaving open the question whether § 2106 affords an alternative procedure for reopening a final judgment in light of new facts
• denying motion for relief under Rule 60(b)(2) & (3) as it was filed four months beyond the one-year time limit
• denying motion for relief under Rule 60(b)(2)&(3) as it was filed four months beyond the one-year time limit
• if it appeared relief were not otherwise available, court would consider \whether the interests of justice would not require (it) to remand to the District Court to consider the claim\
• if it appeared relief were not otherwise available, court would consider “whether the interests of justice would not require [it] to remand to the District Court to consider the claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).