Superior Seafoods, Inc. v. Tyson Foods, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• distinguishing fraud on the court under the savings clause from Rule 60(b) motions and other fraud claims, noting that “[r]elief through an independent equitable action alleging fraud on the court, then, is a truly extraordinary form of relief”
• reviewing denial of Rule 60(d) motion for abuse of discretion, as it “would [not] be appropriate to afford less deference to the considered judgment of the presiding court in the context of a later-filed [Rule 60(d) motion] seeking the same type of relief [as a Rule 60(b
• appeal from action seeking relief from a prior judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d) is reviewed for clear abuse of discretion
• Rule 60(d)(3) relief is extraordinary form of relief, and is available only when it would be unconscionable to allow judgment to stand
• relief under Rule 60(d) is only available where it would be manifestly unconscionable to allow judgment to stand
• “The extraordinary relief afforded pursuant to Rule 60(d) is more difficult to obtain than relief that might be available through a timely Rule 60(b) motion, but it remains the same □ type of relief—relief from.an otherwise final judgment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).