Legal Opinion

United States of America and Scott R. Hammond, Special Agent, Internal Revenue Service v. Rogers Transportation, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided January 7, 1985No. 84-5425PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

ALDISERT, Chief Judge.

We are faced with an appeal taken from a district court’s order under circumstances involving a timely filing of a motion to amend or alter the judgment made under Rule 59(e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The governing case is Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 103 S.Ct. 400, 74 L.Ed.2d 225 (1982), in which the Rule 59(e) motion was timely filed before the filing of the notice of appeal. This case differs from Griggs only in that the Rule 59(e) motion was filed subsequent to the notice of appeal. We hold that this difference…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Universal Minerals, Inc. v. C. A. Hughes & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
  3. West v. KeveCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Venen v. SweetCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
  2. Venen v. SweetCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
  3. Government of the Virgin Islands v. JacobsDistrict Court, Virgin Islands · 1986
  4. Gurst v. Philadelphia Consumer Discount Co. (In re Sheldon Gurst)District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. In Re KanuikaUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1987

8 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