1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. U.S.
  4. 489 U.S.
  5. 489 U.S. 169 (1989)
 

OSTERNECK v. ERNST & WHINNEY

No. 87-1201.

489 U.S. 169 (1989)

109 S.Ct. 987

103 L.Ed.2d 146

OSTERNECK ET AL. v. ERNST & WHINNEY

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided February 21, 1989

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Laurie Webb Daniel argued the cause for petitioners. With her on the briefs were Harold T. Daniel, Jr., Keith M. Wiener, and Paul Webb, Jr.

Gordon Lee Garrett, Jr., argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was William B. B. Smith.

JUSTICE KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court.

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4) provides that if any party files a timely motion "under Rule 59 [of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] to alter or amend the judgment," a notice of appeal filed before the disposition of that motion "shall have no effect." In this case, we decide whether a motion for discretionary prejudgment interest filed after the entry of judgment constitutes a Rule 59 motion to...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases