No. 20-1333
Roy Sheridan v. DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc.
Tags: civil-procedure due-process federal-rules-of-civil-procedure fifth-amendment fourteenth-amendment judgment-on-partial-findings procedural-fairness united-states-v-james-daniel-good-real-property
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Jurisdiction
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Jurisdiction
Latest Conference:
2021-05-20
Question Presented (from Petition)
Does Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(c) violate the Due Process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as this Court articulated in United States v. James Daniel Good Real Property, 510 U.S. 43 (1993), if it permits judgment to be entered in favor of the plaintiff after it rests, but before the defense presents its case, as a judgment against a party that was "fully heard"?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(c) violate the Due Process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments
Docket Entries
2021-05-24
Petition DENIED.
2021-05-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/20/2021.
2021-03-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 23, 2021)
Attorneys
DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc.
Matthew R. Reinhardt — Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., Respondent
Roy Sheridan
Namosha Boykin — The Boykin Law Firm, Petitioner