Legal Opinion

Karl Lutomski and Mary Lutomski v. Panther Valley Coin Exchange and Joseph Snisky

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided July 7, 1981No. 80-1364PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue in this diversity case is whether the district court erred in denying a motion to set aside a default judgment entered against defendants-appellants, Panther Valley Coin Exchange and Joseph Sinsky. We hold that because the requirements of Fed. R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2) were not observed, the judgment must be set aside in part and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Plaintiffs, Karl and Mary Lutomski, filed suit against defendants for fraud and breach of contract for defendants’ failure to send plaintiffs fifty gold coins purchased by mail. Defendants sent them just twenty coins, and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. H. F. Livermore Corporation v. Aktiengesellschaft Gebruder LoepfeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. State of New York and Erin D. Crotty v. Kevan M. Green and Polymer Applications, Inc., Docket No. 04-4070-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
  2. Sun Bank of Ocala v. Pelican Homestead and Savings Association, and Third Party v. American First Mortgage Funding Corp., Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
  3. North Central Illinois Laborers' District Council v. S.J. Groves & Sons Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
  4. Arbogast Family Trust v. River Crossings, LLCUtah Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Key Bank of Maine v. Tablecloth Textile Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996

32 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