The United States District Court for the District of Connecticut vacated a judgment that was improperly entered against an intervening defendant. The Court held that the judgment against the intervening defendant was an inadvertent error as no claims were asserted against the intervening defendant. In addition, the Court held that even if there were claims asserted against the intervening defendant, the Court would not have had jurisdiction over claims brought by plaintiff against the intervening defendant. Zurich American Insurance Company v. Expedient Title, Inc., et al., Case No. 11-cv-1633(MPS) (D. Conn. 2018).
We Will Be There For Every Legal Obstacle You Face
- Supreme Court Grants Permission to Pierce Family Trust to Collect Debts Owed
- Supreme Court Grants Motion to Vacate Contempt
- Second Department Upholds Denial of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim
- Supreme Court Holds Complaint May Reference Language from No Admit Settlement with Regulatory Bodies
- Supreme Court Finds Complaint Sufficiently Pled Alter Ego Claim