§Why CasetextPricing

Henn et al v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company

MOTION to Alter Judgment re Judgment, 202 Order on Motion to Exclude,,, Order on Motion for Summary Judgment,,,,

22 Cited authorities

  1. Servants of Paraclete v. Does

    204 F.3d 1005 (10th Cir. 2000)   Cited 3,292 times
    Holding that district court can grant Rule 59 motions when there has been a change in the law since the prior judgment was issued, the movant presents new evidence that was previously unavailable, or there is a need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice

  2. Barber v. Colorado, Department of Revenue

    562 F.3d 1222 (10th Cir. 2009)   Cited 270 times
    Holding that the DMV did not act with deliberate indifference to the plaintiff's request for reasonable accommodation so as to warrant an award of compensatory damages

  3. Town of Alma v. AZCO Constr., Inc.

    10 P.3d 1256 (Colo. 2000)   Cited 310 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding claims of misrepresentation and fraud sound in tort and are designed to remedy economic loss existing independent of contract claims

  4. BRW, Inc. v. Dufficy & Sons, Inc.

    99 P.3d 66 (Colo. 2004)   Cited 173 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that economic loss rule barred negligence claims because duty to perform in a non-negligent manner was provided for by contract

  5. Janssen v. Harris

    321 F.3d 998 (10th Cir. 2003)   Cited 136 times
    Holding that order of dismissal was a nullity because "under Rule 41 [now Rule 41(A)], a plaintiff has an absolute right to dismiss without prejudice and no action is required on the part of the court"

  6. Zokari v. Gates

    561 F.3d 1076 (10th Cir. 2009)   Cited 104 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding employee failed to demonstrate a causal connection when he could not show that the individuals who took the adverse action were aware of the protected opposition

  7. Grynberg v. Agri Tech, Inc.

    10 P.3d 1267 (Colo. 2000)   Cited 102 times
    Holding that the economic loss rule applied in part because the duty of care was created by, and completely contained in, the contractual provisions

  8. Seven Words LLC v. Network Solutions

    260 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 90 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding claims moot where appellant sought only injunctive and declaratory relief but failed to request damages

  9. Leon v. Marcos

    659 F.3d 1276 (10th Cir. 2011)   Cited 61 times
    Holding that the appellant was entitled to tolling of the time period for filing his notice of appeal, despite the fact that he withdrew his Rule 59 motion, because the district court issued an order acknowledging the withdrawal

  10. Schmier v. McDonald's LLC

    569 F.3d 1240 (10th Cir. 2009)   Cited 57 times
    Holding that, "[l]ike other final judgments, a dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41 can be set aside or modified under [Rule] 60(b)"

  11. Rule 41 - Dismissal of Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 41   Cited 108,094 times   195 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits"

  12. Rule 60 - Relief from a Judgment or Order

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 60   Cited 53,572 times   146 Legal Analyses
    Granting relief from the operation of a judgment

  13. Rule 59 - New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 59   Cited 43,425 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a party to move to alter or amend a judgment "no later than 28 days after the entry of the judgment"

  14. Section 13-80-102 - General limitation of actions - two years

    Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-80-102   Cited 407 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing the general limitation for personal injury claims in Colorado is two years from when the action accrues