Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jividen v. Jividen

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided October 11, 2002No. 30400Published

1DissentAlbright, Justice

The problem with the majority opinion is that it mechanically applies Rule 60(b), a procedural rule whose objective is equitable in nature, to achieve an unjust result in an action that sounds historically in equity. See Di Vito v. Fidelity & Deposit Co., 361 F.2d 936, 939 (7th Cir.1966) (recognizing that “the relief provided by Rule 60(b) is equitable in character and to be administered upon equitable principles”). By rigidly relying on Rule 60(b), all in the name of finality of judgments, the majority has ignored the significance of the remedy at issue — equitable distribution of property —…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Walter Bateman v. United States Postal Service William J. Henderson, 1 Postmaster General, and Aaron Johnson Ben Fukumitsu David Burns Jose MallariCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  2. Bankers Mortgage Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
  3. Solaroll Shade and Shutter Corp., Inc. v. Bio-Energy Systems, Inc., Broward Solar Center, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1986
  4. L. P. Steuart, Inc. v. Joseph H. MatthewsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1964
  5. LaRue v. LaRueWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1983

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API