Second Circuit Rejects Claim of Fraud on the Court Due to Lack of Due Diligence

In Distinctions in Claims of “Fraud on the Court,” Common Law Fraud and Judiciary Law 487, I explained the various concepts and remedies relating to the general rubric of “fraud on the court” under New York State law. And in Claims Against Attorneys Under Judiciary Law 487 Can be Brought in Subsequent Plenary Actions, I explained the interplay between New York CPLR 5015, which provides the procedures for seeking to vacate a judgment, including for alleged fraud, and New York Judiciary Law Section 487, which provides a cause of action and remedies against attorneys who commit egregious acts of fraud in litigation.

There are similar concepts under Federal law.

FRCP 60

In particular, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 60 addresses the various grounds and circumstances under which relief from a judgment can be obtained, including for alleged fraud or fraud on the court.

As it relates to fraud, FRCP 60 has two basic sections for seeking to vacate prior judgments. Under one section, there is a one-year limitation for seeking that relief, while the other section allows relief without a time deadline. Thus, in relevant part FRCP 60 provides:

Read the full blog post here.