Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Alexander McArthur v. Fire Department of the City of New Haven, CT

Date: 11-03-2021

Case Number: 3:20-cv-00974-SRU

Judge: Stefan R. Underhill

Court: United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (New Haven County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Best New Haven Personal Injury Lawyer Directory

Defendant's Attorney: Victoria Margaret Emily Church

Description:

New Haven, Connecticut personal injury lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendant on assault, libel or slander theories claiming to have suffered more than $75,000 in injuries and/or damages as a direct result of Defendant's wrongful conduct.

Outcome:

ORDER denying 16 Motion to Reopen Case. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) permits a district court to grant relief from a judgment based on mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1). Here, McArthur submits only that he was unable to respond to the defendants motion to dismiss because the defendants interfered with his ability to receive mail. Those allegations are insufficient to demonstrate that McArthurs failure to reply to the motion to dismiss, or to my order warning that failure to respond would result in dismissal, were the result of excusable neglect. Accordingly, the motion to reopen is denied. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 10/4/2021. (Powell, G.) (Entered: 10/04/2021)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of Alexander McArthur v. Fire Department of the City of New ...?

The outcome was: ORDER denying 16 Motion to Reopen Case. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) permits a district court to grant relief from a judgment based on mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1). Here, McArthur submits only that he was unable to respond to the defendants motion to dismiss because the defendants interfered with his ability to receive mail. Those allegations are insufficient to demonstrate that McArthurs failure to reply to the motion to dismiss, or to my order warning that failure to respond would result in dismissal, were the result of excusable neglect. Accordingly, the motion to reopen is denied. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 10/4/2021. (Powell, G.) (Entered: 10/04/2021)

Which court heard Alexander McArthur v. Fire Department of the City of New ...?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (New Haven County), CT. The presiding judge was Stefan R. Underhill.

Who were the attorneys in Alexander McArthur v. Fire Department of the City of New ...?

Plaintiff's attorney: Best New Haven Personal Injury Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Victoria Margaret Emily Church.

When was Alexander McArthur v. Fire Department of the City of New ... decided?

This case was decided on November 3, 2021.