noting that Rule 60 “forbids motions to obtain relief from a judgment other than those made under the Federal Rules” and that aside from Rule 59(e), which is not presently applicable, the only Rule providing for relief from a final judgment is Rule 60(b)
How later courts described this case
- noting that Rule 60 “forbids motions to obtain relief from a judgment other than those made under the Federal Rules” and that aside from Rule 59(e), which is not presently applicable, the only Rule providing for relief from a final judgment is Rule 60(b)
- affirming district court’s denial where motion should have been brought pursuant to Rule 60(b) but was instead labeled a “motion for recoupment”
- party sought relief from judgment on grounds not listed in Rule 60(b), leading court to find he had waived any rights he may have had under that Rule
- party who sought relief from judgment on grounds not listed in Rule 60(b) waived any rights he may have had under that Rule
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
RIPPLE, Circuit Judge.
I concur in the result. In my view, the obligation to consider the substance of the motion, not the label the moving party places upon it, required the district court to consider the “motion for recoupment” a Rule 60(b) motion. However, on this record, I cannot say that the district court abused his discretion in declining to grant relief. Accordingly, I join the judgment of the court.