Stephen Tancredi and Ronald Speidel v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a New York Stock Company, and Metlife, Inc., a Delaware Holding Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the district court was required to find ‘excusable neglect’ under Rule 6(b)(2) to extend the time to move for attorneys’ fees after the expiration” of the time limit
• explaining that although there are exceptions to Rule 6(b)(1)(B), the deadline under Rule 54 “is not among them”
• noting that “whenever a district court has federal jurisdiction over a case, it retains ancillary jurisdiction after dismissal to adjudicate collateral matters” (cleaned up)
• finding that a district court “abused its discretion” by awarding attorneys’ fees to the defendant where “[h]indsight prove[d] that plaintiff’s allegation . . . was very weak, but it was not completely without foundation”
• finding that the district court abused its discretion by awarding the defendant attorney fees, explaining that “[h]indsight proves that plaintiffs’ allegation of state action was very weak, but it was not completely without foundation”
• stating rule that “notwithstanding a pending appeal, a district court retains residual jurisdiction over collateral matters”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).