GILMORE
v.
HINMAN
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court's reference to the Auditor was proper and that the motion to vacate the judgment was filed too late.
Appellees sued to set aside a real estate conveyance, and appellant counterclaimed for services and expenses. After a bench trial, the court referred …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 60(b), Fed. R. Civ. P. cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellees brought a civil action to set aside a conveyance of real estate. Appellant filed a cross-complaint for services rendered and for sums expended upon the property. After trial before the court without a jury, the judge made findings of fact and conclusions of law and referred the matter to the Auditor of the court for a report stating the account between the parties. The Auditor held hearings and made a report, to which all parties excepted. The court heard the exceptions, modified the report, and then ratified and confirmed it as modified. Final judgment was entered May 23, 1949. An appeal was noted but not perfected, and so was dismissed.
On October 11, 1950, appellant filed in the District Court a motion to revoke the reference to the Auditor and set aside the judgment. The motion was denied, and appellant appealed on the ground that the trial court lacked authority to make the reference to the Auditor. We think the action of the trial court in making the reference was proper, and, moreover, the motion to vacate the judgment was filed too late. Sixteen months is not “a reasonable time” under these circumstances. Rule 60(b), Fed.R. Civ.P., 28 U.S.C.A. None of the reasons specified in the Rule are present. No other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment appears, and a motion of this sort cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal.
The order of the District Court is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chastain v. Kelley, 510 F.2d 1232 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
-
Morse-Starrett Prods. Co. v. Steccone, 205 F.2d 244 (9th Cir. 1953)
-
Delzona Corp. v. Sacks, 265 F.2d 157 (3d Cir. 1959)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence