Twelve John Does v. District of Columbia Appeal of Edwin A. Meese, Iii, Attorney General of the United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that not all judgments having continuing consequences are “prospective” for the purposes of Rule 60(b)
• noting that not all judgments having continuing consequences are “prospective” for the purposes of Rule 60(b)(5)
• noting that not all judgments having continuing consequences are “prospective” for the purposes of Rule 60(b)(5)
• noting that not all judgments having continuing consequences are “prospective” for the purposes of Rule 60(b)
• noting that not all judgments having continuing consequences are “prospective” for the purposes of Rule 60(b)(5)
• noting that not all judgments having continuing consequences are “prospective” for the purposes of Rule 60(b)(5)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).