13 Cited authorities

Ackermann v. United States
340 U.S. 193 (1950) Cited 1,586 times
Holding that petitioners were not entitled to relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) when they made a "free, calculated, deliberate choic[e]" not to appeal
Wright v. Ernst & Young LLP
152 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 1998) Cited 637 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may not amend its complaint by advancing a new theory of liability for the first time in its opposition to a motion to dismiss
United States ex rel. Karvelas v. Melrose-Wakefield Hospital
360 F.3d 220 (1st Cir. 2004) Cited 372 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that protected conduct is "conduct that reasonably could lead to a viable FCA action"
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers Union, Local No. 59 v. Superline Transportation Co.
953 F.2d 17 (1st Cir. 1992) Cited 333 times
Holding that theories not raised squarely in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal
Mirpuri v. Act Manufacturing, Inc.
212 F.3d 624 (1st Cir. 2000) Cited 106 times
Holding that unless the judgment or order of dismissal that acts as a judgment is set aside or vacated pursuant to Rule 59 or 60, "the district court had no power to allow an amendment to the complaint because there was no complaint left to amend"
Cotto v. U.S.
993 F.2d 274 (1st Cir. 1993) Cited 118 times
Holding that what is reasonable for purposes of a motion brought pursuant to Rule 60(b) "depends on the circumstances" and "may be more or less than the one-year period established for filing motions under Rule 60(b)-"
Acevedo-Villalobos v. Hernandez
22 F.3d 384 (1st Cir. 1994) Cited 98 times
Holding that even though movant filed second Rule 59(e) motion within ten days of denial of first such motion, second motion, which sought relief from the underlying judgment, was untimely because it was filed more than ten days after the entry of that judgment
Wayne Inv. v. Gulf Oil Corp.
739 F.2d 11 (1st Cir. 1984) Cited 105 times
Holding that contingent request for leave to amend made in an opposition to motion to dismiss does not qualify as a motion to amend sufficient to preserve the amendment question for appeal
Paul Revere Variable Annuity Insurance v. Zang
248 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2001) Cited 53 times
Noting that this provision is primarily concerned with "institutional reform litigation" and similar matters
U.S. v. Berenguer
821 F.2d 19 (1st Cir. 1987) Cited 32 times
Upholding district court decision that one year and one week was too long
Rule 60 - Relief from a Judgment or Order
Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 Cited 53,581 times 146 Legal Analyses
Granting relief from the operation of a judgment

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Tambone et al

13 Cited authorities

Holding that petitioners were not entitled to relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) when they made a "free, calculated, deliberate choic[e]" not to appeal

Holding a party may not amend its complaint by advancing a new theory of liability for the first time in its opposition to a motion to dismiss

Holding that protected conduct is "conduct that reasonably could lead to a viable FCA action"

Holding that theories not raised squarely in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal

Holding that unless the judgment or order of dismissal that acts as a judgment is set aside or vacated pursuant to Rule 59 or 60, "the district court had no power to allow an amendment to the complaint because there was no complaint left to amend"

Holding that what is reasonable for purposes of a motion brought pursuant to Rule 60(b) "depends on the circumstances" and "may be more or less than the one-year period established for filing motions under Rule 60(b)-"

Holding that even though movant filed second Rule 59(e) motion within ten days of denial of first such motion, second motion, which sought relief from the underlying judgment, was untimely because it was filed more than ten days after the entry of that judgment

Holding that contingent request for leave to amend made in an opposition to motion to dismiss does not qualify as a motion to amend sufficient to preserve the amendment question for appeal

Noting that this provision is primarily concerned with "institutional reform litigation" and similar matters

Upholding district court decision that one year and one week was too long

Granting relief from the operation of a judgment