From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Doctors' Co. v. Insurance Corp. of Amer

Supreme Court of Wyoming
Sep 15, 1992
837 P.2d 685 (Wyo. 1992)

Opinion

No. 92-68.

September 15, 1992.

Appellant sought "limited remand" to district court for purpose of having court consider motion for relief from judgment. The Supreme Court held that district court may consider such motion and if district court indicates it is inclined to grant it, application then can be made to appellate court for remand.

Motion for limited remand denied.

Arthur H. Downey and Laurel E. Adams, Downey Law Firm, P.C., Denver, Colo., for appellant.

Judith A. Studer, Schwartz, Bon, McCrary Walker, Casper, for appellee, The Ins. Corp. of America.

Before MACY, C.J., and THOMAS, CARDINE, URBIGKIT and GOLDEN, JJ.


The appellant seeks a "limited remand" to the district court for the purpose of having the district court consider a motion to be made pursuant to Wyo.R.Civ.P. 60(b). We have not definitively stated our position on such a request for remand and so avail ourselves of the opportunity to establish a workable procedure for this case, as well as for future such cases. We establish this procedure:

[D]uring the pendency of an appeal the district court may consider a Rule 60(b) motion and if it indicates that it is inclined to grant it, application then can be made to the appellate court for a remand. * * * The logical consequence is that the district court may deny the motion although it cannot, until there has been a remand, grant it * * *. This allows a new appeal from the denial of the motion and often the appellate court can consider that appeal together with the appeal from the original judgment.

11 CHARLES A. WRIGHT ARTHUR R. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, CIVIL § 2873 (1973).

Having established this procedure, it is unnecessary for us to grant the motion for a limited remand and the motion is, therefore, denied. If the appellant chooses to pursue a Rule 60(b) motion, it should be filed in the district court, and the district court has jurisdiction to consider it. Further proceedings in this court relating to such a motion, if any, must await the district court's ruling on that motion.


Summaries of

Doctors' Co. v. Insurance Corp. of Amer

Supreme Court of Wyoming
Sep 15, 1992
837 P.2d 685 (Wyo. 1992)
Case details for

Doctors' Co. v. Insurance Corp. of Amer

Case Details

Full title:The DOCTORS' COMPANY, a California corporation, Appellant (Plaintiff), v…

Court:Supreme Court of Wyoming

Date published: Sep 15, 1992

Citations

837 P.2d 685 (Wyo. 1992)

Citing Cases

Woodward v. Valvoda

"This allows a new appeal from the denial of the motion and often the appellate court can consider that…

Schmalz v. Schmalz

[¶11] Turning to Husband’s perceived W.R.C.P. 60 dilemma, we have previously addressed how an appellant may…