Peters v. M & O Construction, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• where action abated by failure to serve summons within one year, plaintiff inexcusably delayed and so was not entitled to an enlargement of time under civil rule 6(b
• trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying extension of time where defendants had not prevented service, even though effect of dismissal was prejudicial because statute of limitations had run
• trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying extension of time where defendants had not prevented service, even though effect of dismissal was prejudicial because statute of limitations had run
• where action abated by failure to serve summons within one year, plaintiff inexcusably delayed and so was not entitled to an enlargement of time under civil rule 6(b), filing original complaint without serving summons within limitation period did not toll statute of limitations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).