Zurich North America v. Matrix Service, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a party failed to show newly discovered evidence or demonstrate reasonable diligence
• explaining that procedural limitations on Rule 60(b) motions do not apply to fraud on the court allegations
• finding that evidence did not meet the second requirement because Zurich’s counsel knew the documentation was missing almost a year prior to the start of trial
• observing that this court has applied the “heightened fraud on the court standard of . . . Robinson to misconduct claims under [Rule] 60(b)(3)”
• teaching that a party’s litigation mistake is not a basis for relief under Rule 60(b)(1)
• explaining that “[b]y its terms, Rule 60(b)(3) deals with ‘fraud . . . , misrepresentation, or misconduct by an adverse party”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).