Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,795
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 11:
Line 11: − +
Alba v. Marietta Mem. Hosp. (view source)
Revision as of 21:43, August 29, 2008
, 21:43, August 29, 2008indent
:::Plaintiff's only excuse for sitting idly by from 1985 to 1993 is that he was unaware of the existence of a conspiracy or any fraudulent conduct. However, he believed that he was wronged and treated unfairly, and his lawyer suspected at least an anticompetitive if not antitrust purpose, all in 1984. Due diligence requires more than sitting idly by until the facts are someday revealed to you. See Campbell v. Upjohn Co., 676 F.2d 1122, 1128 (6th Cir. 1982). Whatever it requires, it is clear that due diligence requires something more than what Plaintiff did in this case.
:::Plaintiff's only excuse for sitting idly by from 1985 to 1993 is that he was unaware of the existence of a conspiracy or any fraudulent conduct. However, he believed that he was wronged and treated unfairly, and his lawyer suspected at least an anticompetitive if not antitrust purpose, all in 1984. Due diligence requires more than sitting idly by until the facts are someday revealed to you. See Campbell v. Upjohn Co., 676 F.2d 1122, 1128 (6th Cir. 1982). Whatever it requires, it is clear that due diligence requires something more than what Plaintiff did in this case.
(quoting ''Alba v. Marietta Mem'l Hosp.'', 184 F.R.D. 280, 290 (S.D. Ohio 1998).
:(quoting ''Alba v. Marietta Mem'l Hosp.'', 184 F.R.D. 280, 290 (S.D. Ohio 1998).
*
*