Cited by

And Stefanie’s reliance on Estate of Travers, in support of her position is unavailing since that case did not address the issue of post- judgment interest.

¶ 14 (App. 1998) (individual or entity with a claim against the estate is a reasonably ascertainable claimant).

¶ 11 (App. 1998); Fremont Indem.

See, ¶ 21 (App. 1998) (defining statute of limitations as “a legislative enactment which sets maximum time periods during which certain actions can be brought”); Maycock v. Asilomar Dev., Inc., ¶ 28 (App. 2004) (stating that Section 12-552 “sets a period of time within which claims must be brought

le 60(b)(6): Catchall ¶19 Finally, Jonas asked the trial court to vacate the judgment under Rule 60(b)(6) for “any other reason justifying relief.” Sometimes referred to as the “catchall,” this clause applies only where none of the other subsections of Rule 60(b) apply and the motion raises “extraordinary circumstances of hardship or injustice.” Stewart v. Travers (Estate of Travers), ¶ 24 (App. 1998) (-87 (1982)).

-35, ¶ 11 , -69 (App.1998).

¶ 21 , (“A statute of limitations is a legislative enactment which sets maximum time periods during which certain actions can be brought.” (citing Black’s Law Dictionary 927 (6th ed.1990))).

11 ¶ 22 , (recognizing that Rule 6(b) “expressly bars the extension of time for filing a Rule 60(c)(3) motion”).

¶ 21 , (defining statute of limitations as "a legislative enactment which sets maximum time periods during which certain actions can be brought") (citing Black's Law Dictionary 927 (6th ed.1990)).

In re Estate of *533 Travers, -35, ¶ 11 , -69 (App.1998).