Neil Gorsuch Questions Attorney on Rule 60 Compliance in Coney Island Auto Parts Case

Gorsuch's Inquiry on Rule 60 Compliance

• ❓ Justice Gorsuch questioned the attorney regarding compliance with a C1 regulation and its reasonable time limit.
• 🎯 The attorney confirmed that the argument for complying with C1 within a reasonable time was not presented in this case.

The Void Ab Initio Argument

• ⚖️ The attorney argued that if a judgment is void ab initio, it is inherently invalid.
• 📌 This implies that the concept of a "reasonable time" limit might not apply to such judgments.

Collateral Attack and Rule 60(d)(1)

• 📉 The attorney acknowledged that the case law on Rule 60(d)(1) is sparse.
• 💡 A Rule 60(d)(1) motion is typically filed when other avenues under Rule 60(b)(1)-(3) have expired.
• ⚠️ If the court rules against Coney Island's position, it would likely end the case for them.

Preserving Options for Appeal

• 🗣️ When asked how the court could write its opinion to preserve options, the attorney requested clarification.
• ✍️ The attorney suggested the court could state that the reasonable time limitation in Rule 60(c)(1) applies to 60(b)(4) motions, but that there is otherwise no time limit under Rule 60(d)(1).