Roy v. Preston

How courts have described this case

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

• emphasizing that, under Rule 60(b)(2), a movant must exercise “due diligence” in obtaining information that was available
• noting that a party moving for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(2) “must demonstrate [] that it exercised due diligence in obtaining the information”
• holding that a party invoking Rule 56(d) protections must “affirmatively demonstrate . . . how postponement of a ruling on the motion will enable him, by discovery and other means, to rebut the movant's showing of the absence of a genuine issue of fact”
• finding that testimony that mariners generally rely on Coast Guard’s dissemination of information failed to address whether the particular accident involved detrimental reliance on the part of the pleasure boat owner
• holding that a party invoking Rule 56(d
• dismissing defendant United States Coast Guard as a party for lack of jurisdiction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).