Rule 60 motion

Federal Court Rejects Seneca Effort to Vacate Judgment on Gaming Payments to State

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the new materials in Seneca Nation v. State of New York (W.D. N.Y.):

40-1 rule 60 motion.pdfDownload
47 opposition.pdfDownload
48 reply.pdfDownload
51 seneca notice.pdfDownload
51-1 nigc letter.pdfDownload
51-2 seneca letter.pdfDownload
55 seneca notice.pdfDownload
55-1 newland letter.pdfDownload
56 ny response.pdfDownload
58 dct order.pdfDownload

Wakpamni Lake Corp. Seeks Relief from Default Judgment in TED Bonds Fraud Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the pleading from Michelin Retirement Plan v. Dilworth Paxon LLP (D.S.C.):

608 WLCC Rule 60 Motion

608-1 Lone Hill Declaration

608-15 Victim Impact Statement

608-16 Raynes Declaration

An excerpt from the motion:

In or about the fall of 2017, a man named Quattlebaum contacted WLCC and Wakpamni Lake Community President Lone Hill on three separate occasions. (Lone Hill Decl. ¶ 27; see also Raynes Decl. ¶ 16.) President Lone Hill understood that Mr. Quattlebaum was Judge Quattlebaum, then a United States District Judge for this Court.1 (Lone Hill Decl. ¶ 27; see also Raynes Decl. ¶ 16.) Mr. Quattlebaum asked President Lone Hill about the financial state of WLCC and Wakpamni Lake Community and about the subject matter of the lawsuit. (Lone Hill Decl. ¶ 27.) Based on the information received, Mr. Quattlebaum deduced that WLCC and the Wakpamni Lake Community were destitute. (Id.) President Lone Hill understood from her conversations with Mr. Quattlebaum that he understood and appreciated their innocent and impoverished position. President Lone Hill further understood and believed that Mr. Quattlebaum—as a judge of this Court—indicated to her that no further action was needed with respect to this case.

Prior post in this case here.