finding that even if appellant did not receive notice of entry of judgment within the appeal period he was not entitled to Rule 60(b) relief because he had not alleged that “he diligently monitored” the docket to see if a ruling had been issued.
Summary of this case from Gonzalez v. T, Caribex Worldwide, Angel Rijos Ortiz, Fiscal De Distrito De AguadillaNo. 97-1484.
September 18, 1997.
Appeal from the D.Mass.
Affirmed.
finding that even if appellant did not receive notice of entry of judgment within the appeal period he was not entitled to Rule 60(b) relief because he had not alleged that “he diligently monitored” the docket to see if a ruling had been issued.
Summary of this case from Gonzalez v. T, Caribex Worldwide, Angel Rijos Ortiz, Fiscal De Distrito De AguadillaFull title:MSM Industries, Inc, v. Zurich Ins. Co
Court:United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Date published: Sep 18, 1997
SSR 88–3 does not exist, but the proposition for which it was cited is undoubtedly correct. See, e.g., May v.…
McFall v. ColvinAlthough the claimant bears the burden of proving that she suffers from a severe impairment, the First…