Legal Opinion
Miller v. Werner
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 27, 1962No. 3085PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAYTON, Acting Judge.'
Plaintiff appeals from an order vacating an entry of default. Defendant’s motion to vacate, filed some seven months after the default, was based on a claim of “excusable mistake and/or inadvertence,” under Rule 60(b) of the trial court, which rule imposes a limitation of three months after judgment for the filing of such motion.
Defendant asks us to rule that this limitation did not apply to him because there was no final judgment in the case. But the records of the trial court show this entry on the trial jacket: “Judgment for Plaintiff, on ex parte proof, for $3,000.00,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Osbourne v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- Askew v. Randolph Carney Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1955
- Haller v. WalczakMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
- In Re Realty Associates Securities CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1944
- Abbattista v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brown v. CookeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1966
- Da Costa v. RubenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1967
- Franklyn v. ElliottDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1963