Sam Title, AKA Sam Teitelman v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining it had to “assume that there was a purpose in the [Supreme Court’s language in Zucca] referenc[ing] . . . a ‘procedural’ prerequisite rather than a ‘jurisdictional’ prerequisite”
• “Rule 60(b) was not intended to 13 provide relief for error on the part of the court or to afford a substitute for appeal.”
• “Rule 60(b) was not intended to provide relief for error on the part of the court or to afford a substitute for appeal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).