Raymond King v. Steven M. Newbold

How courts have described this case

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

• describing a Rule 54(b) motion “filed more than thirty days after the entry of the [specific] adjudication to which it relates” (citation modified)
• describing a Rule 54(b) motion “filed more than thirty days after the entry of the [specific] adjudication to which it relates” (citation modified)
• “as a general rule it is an abuse of discretion for a district judge to grant a motion for a Rule 54(b) order when the motion is filed more than thirty days after the entry of the adjudication to which it relates.”
• discussing the timing of a Rule 54(b) motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Niki DaSilva v. State of Indiana
  Seventh Circuit· 2022-04-06· cited 9×
• United States v. Nicole Schuster
  Third Circuit· 2026-01-14
• United States v. Nicole Schuster
  Third Circuit· 2026-03-23

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. General Electric Co.
  Supreme Court· 1980-04-22· cited 1,545×
• Horn v. Transcon Lines, Inc.
  Seventh Circuit· 1990-04-02· cited 98×
• Robert Schaefer and Sandra Schaefer v. First National Bank of Lincolnwood
  First Circuit· 1972-07-07· cited 44×
• General Insurance Co. of America v. Clark Mall Corp.
  Seventh Circuit· 2011-05-04· cited 41×