Coney Island Auto Parts v. Burton | Case No. 24-808 | Oral Argument Date: 11/5/25 | Docket Link: Here

Question Presented: Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) imposes any time limit to set aside a default judgment void for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Overview

This episode examines a deceptively simple civil procedure case that could fundamentally reshape how federal courts handle void judgments, creating a constitutional tension between centuries-old legal principles and modern procedural rules about timing requirements for challenging judgments that courts never had authority to enter.

Episode Roadmap

Opening: The Void Judgment Paradox

• November 5th, 2025 oral argument date
• Circuit split: Sixth Circuit stands alone against every other federal circuit
• Core tension: Can procedural rules validate what should never have existed?
• Affects every federal court nationwide using Rule 60

Background: The Seven-Year Journey

• Vista-Pro Automotive bankruptcy in Nashville, Tennessee
• February 2015: Default judgment against Coney Island Auto Parts for $48,696.21
• Coney Island claims never received proper service - no personal jurisdiction
• 2020: Trustee registers judgment in New York, freezes $100,000 in bank accounts
• March 2022: Seven years later, Coney Island files Rule 60(b)(4) motion to vacate

The Central Legal Question

• Rule 60(b)(4): Courts can vacate judgments that "are void"
• Rule 60(c)(1): "Any motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time"
• Does "reasonable time" apply to truly void judgments?
• Fundamental question: Can time limits apply to legal nullities?

Lower Court Journey

• Tennessee bankruptcy court grants motion to vacate
• Sixth Circuit reverses 2-1, applies "reasonable time" requirement
• Creates circuit split with every other federal circuit
• Supreme Court grants certiorari to resolve nationwide inconsistency

Constitutional Framework: Due Process and Jurisdiction

• Personal jurisdiction: Court's authority over parties
• Void judgment: "No judgment at all" - legal nullity from inception
• Due process concerns: Enforcing judgments without proper notice
• Historical principle: Void judgments attackable at any time

Petitioner's Arguments (Coney Island Auto Parts):

Argument 1: Logical Impossibility

• "If a judgment is void immediately upon entry, how could the passage of time vivify it?"
• Void means legal nullity - cannot gain validity through delay
• Procedural rules cannot breathe life into what never existed

Argument 2: Historical Practice and Tradition

• Centuries of precedent allowing challenges to void judgments at any time
• 1946 Advisory Committee intended "reasonable time" for voidable, not void judgments
• Advisory Committee statements distinguish void from voidable judgments

Argument 3: Judicial Consensus

• Every circuit except Sixth Circuit recognizes exception for void judgments
• Well-established understanding that void judgments are special category
• Circuit split demonstrates widespread acceptance of traditional rule

Respondent's Arguments (Burton):

Argument 1: Plain Text Controls

• Rule 60(c)(1): "A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time"
• Rule 60(b)(4) is part of Rule 60(b) - text is unambiguous
• Every tool of statutory interpretation supports time limits

Argument 2: Rule Structure and Drafting History

• Drafters knew how to create exceptions - did so for Rules 60(b)(1)-(3)
• Advisory Committee rejected proposal imposing no time limits for void judgments
• Committee agreed "all motions should be made within a reasonable time"

Argument 3: Procedural vs. Substantive Distinction

• Time limits don't validate void judgments - they impose procedural requirements
• Distinction between judgment validity and challenge procedures
• Prevents "flagrantly inequitable conduct" and protects finality interests

Episode HighlightsKey Legal Concepts Explained

• Personal Jurisdiction: Court's legal authority over parties to a lawsuit
• Void Judgment: Legal nullity with no validity from the moment entered
• Default Judgment: Judgment entered when defendant fails to respond
• Rule 60(b)(4): Federal rule allowing relief from void judgments
• Service of Process: Legal requirement to provide proper notice of lawsuit
• Circuit Split: When federal appeals courts reach conflicting decisions
• Due Process: Constitutional requirement of fair legal proceedings