464 B.R. 61
6th Cir. BAP2011Background
- Burrage filed an adversary proceeding on August 6, 2008.
- Bank One and Burrage reached an oral settlement on October 4, 2010, which led the bankruptcy court to cancel the trial.
- On October 5, 2010 Burrage acknowledged the settlement but later disagreed and sought to proceed to trial; the court extended 14 days for a written agreement.
- The bankruptcy court held an evidentiary hearing on February 11, 2011 and found an enforceable settlement with terms set forth in an order.
- Burrage did not appeal the February 11, 2011 order; she moved to reopen the proceeding on March 3, 2011 seeking to introduce purported new evidence; the court treated it as a Rule 60(b) motion and denied it on April 7, 2011.
- Burrage appealed, challenging the denial of the motion to reopen; the Panel affirmed, holding no abuse of discretion in denying reopening.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the bankruptcy court abused its discretion in denying Burrage’s motion to reopen. | Burrage argued the new evidence warrants reopening. | Bank One contends the evidence wasn't new or persuasive. | No abuse of discretion; motion to reopen affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United States, 489 U.S. 794 (U.S. 1989) (finality and standard for reviewing denial of motions to reopen)
- B-Line, LLC v. Wingerter, 594 F.3d 931 (6th Cir. 2010) (abuse-of-discretion standard in reconsideration rulings)
- Olle v. Henry & Wright Corp., 910 F.2d 357 (6th Cir. 1990) (due diligence and new-evidence standard in Rule 60(b))
- Barlow v. M.J. Waterman & Assocs., Inc., 227 F.3d 604 (6th Cir. 2000) (review of discretionary decisions under abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Elec. Workers Pension Trust Fund of Local Union #58, IBEW v. Gary’s Elec. Serv. Co., 340 F.3d 373 (6th Cir. 2003) (clear-error and misapplication of law standard review)
- GenCorp, Inc. v. Gencorp Plastics, Inc., 178 F.3d 834 (6th Cir. 1999) (new evidence and Rule 60(b) considerations; unavailable evidence prerequisite)
- Good v. Ohio Edison Co., 149 F.3d 413 (6th Cir. 1998) (due-diligence and materiality requirements for Rule 60(b)(2))