Legal Opinion
Roditi v. New River Investments Inc.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided January 29, 2025No. 3:20-cv-01908Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MANUEL RODITI and VENICE Case No.: 20-cv-01908-RBM-MSB BEJARANO, 12 ORDER DENYING Plaintiffs/Judgment Creditors, 13 DEFENDANT/JUDGMENT DEBTOR v. ALBERTO RODITI’S MOTION 14 UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL NEW RIVER INVESTMENTS INC., 15 PROCEDURE 60(b)(3) ALBERTO RODITI, and GUILLERMO 16 RODITI DOMINGUEZ, [ECF No. 249] 17 Defendants/Judgment Debtors. 18 19 Pending before the Court is Defendant/Judgment Debtor Alberto Roditi’s 20 (“Roditi”)1 “Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 To Amend Order Granting Plaintiffs’…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Zamani v. CarnesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- United States v. Westlands Water DistrictDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2001
- Shannon Casey v. Albertson's Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Delay v. GordonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- In Re M/v Peacock, on the Complaint of Oskco Edwards, Harry M. Tompkins, and Fair Field Industries. Tracy Maudlin v. M/v Peacock, on the Complaint of Oskco Edwards, Harry M. Tompkins, and Fair Field Industries v. Dianne Craig, Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.