Skip to main content
Third Circuit· 11/5/1984

Scarborough v. Eubanks

Citations

  • 747 F.2d 871
  • 40 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 306

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding that, although the plaintiff’s pretrial documents were “filed inexcusably late,” it was not the same history of dilatoriness present in Poulis
  • finding that, although the plaintiff’s pretrial documents were “filed inexcusably late,” it was not the same history of dilatoriness present in Poulis, 747 F.2d at 868
  • offering examples of prejudice such as the “irretrievable loss of evidence, the inevitable dimming of witnesses’ memories, or the excessive and possibly irremediable burdens or costs imposed on the opposing party”
  • where attorney filed all required papers, albeit some tardily, behavior was not willful or contumacious
  • “As we have repeatedly stated, doubts should be resolved in favor of reaching a decision on the merits.”
  • “As we have repeatedly stated, doubts should be resolved in favor of reaching a decision on the merits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sloviter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

59 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Scarborough v. Eubanks

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.