TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Yvonne Lewis Montgomery v. Toxey E. Hall, M.D.

Yvonne Lewis MONTGOMERY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Toxey E. HALL, M.D., Defendant-Appellant

Montgomery v. Hall, 592 F.2d 278 (5th Cir. 1979)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
April 2, 1979
Docket
No. 78-3061
Judges
Goldberg, Per Curiam, Roney, Tjoflat
Citations
592 F.2d 2781979 U.S. App. LEXIS 15725

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate a judgment on grounds of alleged fraud and misconduct by the plaintiff. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3) provides that a court may relieve a party from a final judgment for those reasons. Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(3). However, the party making the rule 60(b)(3) motion must establish by clear and convincing evidence (1) that the ad *279 verse party engaged in fraud or other misconduct and (2) that this misconduct prevented the moving party from fully and fairly presenting his case.

Rozier v. Ford Motor Co., 573 F.2d 1332, 1341 (5th Cir. 1978). The resolution of these two issues is within the trial court’s discretion, and on review, our only inquiry is whether the trial court abused its discretion.

Id.

at 1346 .

Defendant argues that the plaintiff’s alleged failure to fully answer two interrogatories constitutes the requisite misconduct. Our cases have held that a party may engage in rule 60(b)(3) misconduct if he fails to disclose evidence he knows about and the production of such evidence was clearly called for “by any fair reading” of the discovery order.

Id.

at 1341 . We have carefully examined the record and agree with District Judge William C. Keady’s conclusion that in this case a fair reading of the discovery order did not call for the evidence in question. As Judge Keady stated, “We do not perceive that a request for the names of treating physicians can fairly be said to require the disclosure of all places where the plaintiff may have been treated without regard to the presence or absence of a treating physician.”

1

Clearly, then, we cannot conclude that the district court abused its discretion in finding that the defendant failed to establish misconduct by the plaintiff. For this reason, we affirm the trial court's denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate judgment.

AFFIRMED.

1

. In response to the request for the names of treating physicians, plaintiff failed to disclose a clinic she had visited where she had been examined by a nurse.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 5 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 37 cases

View all citing references →
1980: 11981: 11983: 11985: 31986: 21987: 11988: 21989: 11990: 21992: 31995: 22000: 12001: 12003: 12004: 22006: 12007: 12009: 12011: 12012: 12014: 12017: 22020: 12022: 12023: 12026: 219802026peak 1985 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Government Financial Services One Ltd. Partnership v. Peyton Place, Inc.62 F.3d 767 (5th Cir. 1995)
  2. Harduvel v. General Dynamics Corp.801 F. Supp. 597 (M.D. Fla. 1992)
  3. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. v. NL Industries618 F. Supp. 2d 614 (S.D. Tex. 2009)
  4. Diaz v. Methodist Hospital46 F.3d 492 (5th Cir. 1995)
  5. E.F. Hutton & Co. v. Berns757 F.2d 215 (8th Cir. 1985)
  6. E.F. Hutton & Company, Inc. v. Melford Berns and Lenny Garcia, Gerald J757 F.2d 215 (8th Cir. 1985)

Most recent

  1. In re Steinmetz Plumbing, Inc.No. 25-37611 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. June 24, 2026)
  2. Jason Rudolph Stanford; Jason Stanford d/b/a Rollin Smoke at the Attache v. Stephen SatherNo. 25-04094 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. Jan. 16, 2026)
  3. Jenkins v. Tarrant Cty Shrf's OfcNo. 22-10718 (5th Cir. Sept. 1, 2023)
  4. Trantham v. Socoper IncNo. 1:16-cv-01476 (N.D. Ala. Mar. 28, 2022)
  5. Renfroe v. ParkerNo. 3:18-cv-00609 (S.D. Miss. Oct. 28, 2020)
  6. M.M. v. K.J.Z.249 So. 3d 1144 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Martha Ann Brundage Rozier v. Ford Motor Co., 573 F.2d 1332 (5th Cir. 1978) 429

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list