Bakery Machinery & Fabrication, Inc. v. Traditional Baking, Inc. case brief summary
570 F.3d 845 (7th Cir. 2009)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Appellant Illinois corporation sought review of orders from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, which entered a default judgment against the Illinois corporation and denied its motion to vacate the default.
OVERVIEW:
-This case involved a contract dispute between the Illinois corporation and appellee, a California corporation.
-The district court entered a default judgment against the Illinois corporation after its attorney repeatedly missed filing dates and failed to respond to court orders.
-The Illinois corporation obtained new counsel and argued on appeal that the default judgment should be vacated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) because more than simple misconduct by its attorney was involved. -Here, the former attorney affirmatively deceived a diligent client about the litigation's status.
HOLDING:
The court disagreed, noting that this was an example of how the sins of a lawyer could be visited upon the client.
ANALYSIS:
-The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the lawyer's inexcusable neglect did not present the exceptional circumstances necessary for relief under Rule 60(b)(6).
-While the Illinois corporation apparently did not have a remedy against the former attorney because he did not carry malpractice insurance, this reason did not deem the district court's denial of the motion to vacate an abuse of discretion under Rule 60(b)(6).
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the district court's orders.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
570 F.3d 845 (7th Cir. 2009)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Appellant Illinois corporation sought review of orders from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, which entered a default judgment against the Illinois corporation and denied its motion to vacate the default.
OVERVIEW:
-This case involved a contract dispute between the Illinois corporation and appellee, a California corporation.
-The district court entered a default judgment against the Illinois corporation after its attorney repeatedly missed filing dates and failed to respond to court orders.
-The Illinois corporation obtained new counsel and argued on appeal that the default judgment should be vacated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) because more than simple misconduct by its attorney was involved. -Here, the former attorney affirmatively deceived a diligent client about the litigation's status.
HOLDING:
The court disagreed, noting that this was an example of how the sins of a lawyer could be visited upon the client.
ANALYSIS:
-The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the lawyer's inexcusable neglect did not present the exceptional circumstances necessary for relief under Rule 60(b)(6).
-While the Illinois corporation apparently did not have a remedy against the former attorney because he did not carry malpractice insurance, this reason did not deem the district court's denial of the motion to vacate an abuse of discretion under Rule 60(b)(6).
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the district court's orders.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment