complaint

BLOM Bank SAL v. Honickman

Issues

Whether the strict standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) always applies to a post-judgment request to vacate in order to file an amended complaint, or if a balancing test can be applied in lieu? 

This case asks the Court to determine whether the strict standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) always applies to a post-judgment request to vacate in order to file an amended complaint, or if a balancing test can be applied instead. Petitioner BLOM Bank SAL argues that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6)’s stringent standard must apply to a post-judgment request to vacate for the purpose of filing an amended complaint, contrary to the Second Circuit’s ruling. Respondent Honickman argues that Rule 60(b)(6)’s stringent standard need not apply to a post-judgment request to vacate for the purpose of filing an amended complaint, because the Second Circuit’s decision to use a balancing test serves as a better standard to review the Rule. BLOM Bank SAL argues that ruling in favor of Honickman would undermine the finality of judgments by allowing post-judgment amendments under Rule 60(b)(6) too liberally. Honickman counters by arguing that ruling in BLOM Bank SAL’s favor would prevent victims of terrorism from obtaining justice, particularly in cases where new evidence emerges post-judgement.

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6)’s stringent standard applies to a post-judgment request to vacate for the purpose of filing an amended complaint.

The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (“JASTA”) extends liability to people who knowingly provide substantial assistance to or conspire with those responsible for acts of international terrorism. Brief for Petitioner, BLOM Bank SAL,

Additional Resources

Submit for publication
0

Krupski v. Costa Crociere

Issues

Whether a plaintiff, who has imputed knowledge of the identity of a defendant, files an amended complaint to add the known defendant after a  one-year statute of limitations, can “relate back” to the filing date of the original complaint through the application of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c)?

 

Wanda Krupski (“Krupski”) suffered an injury as a passenger on a cruise ship owned and operated by Costa Crociere S.p.A. (“Costa Crociere”). In the United States District Court of the Southern District of Florida, her lawyer filed suit against Costa Cruise, N.V., LLC, Costa Crociere’s booking agent. The parties dismissed that suit by stipulation, because the owner and operator of a cruise ship is subject to liability, not the booking agent. Krupski filed an amended complaint against Costa Crociere—the correct party. Costa Crociere filed a motion to dismiss. The district court granted the motion, finding that Krupski had not made a “mistake” within the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) (“Rule 15(c)”) that would allow the amendment to relate back to the original filing of the complaint. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court’s decision will clarify what constitutes a “mistake” within the meaning of Rule 15(c).

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(c)(l)(C) Permits An Amended Complaint To "Relate Back", For Limitation Purposes, When The Amendment Corrects A, "Mistake Concerning The Proper Party's Identity". Other Circuit Courts of Appeal Construe The Rule As Applying To Substitution Of The Correct Defendant For A Related Corporation With A Similar Name. The Eleventh Circuit Has Concluded That There Can Be No Such "Mistake" Where The Plaintiff Had Imputed Knowledge Of The Identity Of The Added Defendant Prior To Filing Suit. Does The Eleventh Circuit Construction Of Rule 15(c)(l)(C) Undermine The Purpose Of The Rule And Is It Inconsistent With The Decisions In Other Circuits?

Wanda Krupski used a South Carolina-based travel agent to purchase a cruise from Costa Cruise Lines, N.V., LLC (“Costa Cruise”) in Hollywood, Florida. Krupski v. Costa Crociere, 330 Fed.Appx. 892, 893 (11th Cir.

Written by

Edited by

Additional Resources

·      Wex: Law about Civil Procedure

·      Wex: Law about Complaint

·      Wex: Law about Pleading

Submit for publication
0
Subscribe to complaint