§Why CasetextPricing

Parker et al v. District of Columbia

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply To Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff's Opposition to D.C.s Motion to Dismiss

9 Cited authorities

  1. Jackson v. Beech

    636 F.2d 831 (D.C. Cir. 1980)   Cited 674 times
    Holding that all doubts are to be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief thus increasing the likelihood that disputes will be resolved on their merits

  2. Oberstar v. F.D.I.C

    987 F.2d 494 (8th Cir. 1993)   Cited 224 times
    Finding twenty-two day delay did not prejudice non-moving party

  3. Tolson v. Hodge

    411 F.2d 123 (4th Cir. 1969)   Cited 320 times
    Finding that the mere assertion of facts constituting a meritorious defense in an original complaint satisfied the requirement of presenting a meritorious defense to a counterclaim upon which default judgment had been entered and noting "one of plaintiff's intended defenses to the counterclaim had already been pleaded; the answer sought to be filed would have repeated it more formally . . ."

  4. Barber v. Turberville

    218 F.2d 34 (D.C. Cir. 1954)   Cited 82 times
    Determining that, when plaintiff demands a jury trial and subsequently has a default entered, "it is the better practice, if not actually compelled, that the issue as to damages be submitted to the jury"

  5. Consolidated Gas Equip. Co. v. Carver

    257 F.2d 111 (10th Cir. 1958)   Cited 53 times
    In Consolidated Gas and Equipment Company of America v. Carver, 10 Cir., 257 F.2d 111, we recognized the burden on the complaining litigant in a post-verdict hearing to show that failure of a juror to fully and truthfully answer questions propounded to the panel concerning his experience in similar litigation resulted in prejudice to his cause.

  6. Asia North America Eastbound Rate Agreement v. BJI Industries, Inc.

    900 F. Supp. 507 (D.D.C. 1995)   Cited 6 times

    Civ. A. No. 94-903 SSH. August 28, 1995. Cindy G. Buys, Jeffrey F. Lawrence, Anne E. Mickey, Sher Blackwell, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Daniel E. Johnson, Gary H. Sampliner, McKenna Cuneo, Washington, DC, for Respondent. OPINION STANLEY S. HARRIS, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on petitioner's petition to confirm the arbitral award, petitioner's motion for default judgment, respondent's counter-motion to set aside entry of default, petitioner's renewed motion to confirm arbitral

  7. Asia North America Eastbound Rate Agreement v. BJI Industries, Inc.

    923 F. Supp. 4 (D.D.C. 1996)   Cited 1 times
    Applying Hong Kong law in arbitration enforcement case because ‘ “[u]nder American law, contractual choice-of-law provisions are usually honored.’ ” (quoting Milanovich v. Costa Crociere, S.p.A., 954 F.2d 763, 767 (D.C.Cir.1992))

  8. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 50,129 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  9. Rule 55 - Default; Default Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 55   Cited 34,084 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Adopting similar language for acquiring default judgment against the United States