M.D. v. Newport-Mesa Unified School Dist.

The district court abused its discretion in denying plaintiff’s Rule 60(b)(1) motion for relief from dismissal due to its having filed an amended complaint two days after the deadline, since there was no prejudice, no bad faith, and the short delay was attributable to a reasonable misunderstanding of the district court’s docketing practices.  The district court abused its discretion in denying plaintiff’s Rule 60(b)(1) motion for relief from dismissal due to its having filed an amended complaint two days after the deadline.  In evaluating a 60(b) motion, the court should consider at least four factors:  (1) prejudice to the opposing party, (2) length of delay and its effect on proceedings, (3) reason for delay, and (4) whether movant acted in good faith.  Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assoc., Ltd. P’ship (1993) 507 U.S. 380, 395.  Here, the two-day delay didn’t prejudice the defendant.  It was a short delay reasonably explained by a mistaken understanding of the effect of redocketing the same order two days later.  And there was no showing of bad faith.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (per curiam); October 19, 2016; 2016 WL 6091565

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s