I am stumped by this hypo and could use some help:
If P who has won a judgment against D seeks to add an additional D in the same suit AFTER entry of judgment, would the judgment against the original D be void?
I am thrown off by the wording a bit, but I think the judgment would still be valid under 60(b), but am unsure. Greatly appreciate the help.
Civ Pro: FRCP Rule 60 Hypo Help Forum
-
Mr.Throwback
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 3:42 pm
Re: Civ Pro: FRCP Rule 60 Hypo Help
Need more facts. Analyze each element under 60(b):
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(4) the judgment is void;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.
Without knowing the facts, If D is liable to P then i don't see why it would be void.
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(4) the judgment is void;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.
Without knowing the facts, If D is liable to P then i don't see why it would be void.
