Legal Opinion
Nader v. SERODY
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 10, 2012No. 09-CV-906PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUIZ, Associate Judge, Retired:
Ralph Nader challenges the trial court’s denial of his Rule 60(b) and Rule 41(b) motions to set aside a Pennsylvania judgment that appellees sought to enforce in the District of Columbia. We affirm the judgment of the trial court enforcing the Pennsylvania judgment, as consistent with the principles of the Full Faith and Credit Clause.
I. Procedural Posture
This case arrived at the doorstep of the Superior Court after a long and convoluted history in the courts of Pennsylvania. Ap-pellees are registered voters in Pennsylvania. They successfully challenged, in the…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Angel v. BullingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Durfee v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Underwriters National Assurance Co. v. North Carolina Life & Accident & Health Insurance Guaranty Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Micula v. Government of Romania, TheDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Ahmad Hamad Al Gosaibi & Brothers Company v. Standard Chartered BankDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- J.J. v. B.A.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- In re Petition of S.U. & C.U. C.J.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2023
- Micula v. Government of Romania, TheDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015