No. 23-1253

McLaughlin Freight Services, Inc. v. ContiTech USA, Inc.

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-05-31
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: civil-procedure claim-processing claim-processing-rules federal-rules-of-civil-procedure judgment judgment-amendment nutraceutical-corp-v-lambert remittitur rule-59 sua-sponte time-limitation
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration LaborRelations
Latest Conference: 2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can a district court disregard Rule 59's claim-processing rule by sua sponte remitting and amending a judgment more than nine months after Rule 59's twenty-eight-day deadline expires?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(d) establishes a twenty-eight-day deadline for a court to award a new trial on its own initiative, and Rule 59(e) imposes the same deadline to alter or amend a judgment. This Court has held that similar rules of procedure are mandatory claim-processing rules that courts cannot “disregard.” Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, 139 S. Ct. 710, 714 (2019). The question presented is: Can a district court disregard Rule 59’s claim-processing rule by swa sponte remitting and amending a judgment more than nine months after Rule 59’s twenty-eight-day deadline expires?

Docket Entries

2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-07-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-01
Brief of ContiTech USA, Inc. in opposition submitted.
2024-07-01
2024-05-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 1, 2024)

Attorneys

ContiTech USA, Inc.
Michael Ambrose DeeBrown, Winick, Graves, Gross and Baskerville, PLC, Respondent
Michael Ambrose DeeBrown, Winick, Graves, Gross and Baskerville, PLC, Respondent
McLaughlin Freight Services, Inc.
Abram Vogel CarlsSimmons Perrine Moyer Bergman, PLC, Petitioner
Abram Vogel CarlsSimmons Perrine Moyer Bergman, PLC, Petitioner