Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Massachusetts opinions name it 1 courts 1993–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Massachusetts courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Vicinity v. Langisgreen1 sentence2025Despite the fact that the good cause standard of rule 55 (c) is "less stringent" than the excusable neglect standard of rule 60 (b) (1), see Institution for Sav. in Newburyport & Its Vicinity v. Langis, 92 Mass. App. Ct. 815, 822 (2018), and the judge's ruling applied rule 55 (c), the defendant again frames his appellate argument under the paradigm of rule 60 (b) (1). | 1 | 1 |
Ceruolo v. Garciagreen1 sentence2023See Ceruolo v. Garcia, 92 Mass. App. Ct. 185 , 188 (2017) ("The excusable neglect standard is applied after judgment has entered. | 1 | 1 |
Berube v. McKesson Wine & Spirits Co.green1 sentence2017Even under rule 60(b), however, a "liberal . . . application" is warranted where, as here, "the mischief leading to the judgment occurs at the pretrial stage." Berube v. McKesson Wine & Spirits Co., 7 Mass. App. Ct. 426, 429 (1979). 7 may set aside an entry of default"). | 1 | 1 |
Greenleaf v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authoritygreen1 sentence1993Authy., 22 Mass. App. Ct. 426, 429 (1986) (applying the excusable neglect test to cases involving Mass.R.Civ.P. 60[b], 365 Mass. 828 [1974]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bernard v. United Brands Co.
green
1 sentence2024Bernard v. United Brands Co., 27 Mass. App. Ct. 415 , 418 n.8 (1989). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.