No. 23-1259October Term 2024Decided Jun 5, 2025
BLOM Bank SAL, Petitioner v. Michal Honickman, et al.
The Supreme Court held that a party seeking to reopen a final judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) must demonstrate extraordinary circumstances, even if their goal is merely to file an amended complaint.
Case status
- Current stage
- Decided
- Latest event
- Decision released Jun 5, 2025
- What it's about
The Supreme Court held that a party seeking to reopen a final judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) must demonstrate extraordinary circumstances, even if their goal is merely to file an amended complaint. The Court rejected the argument that the more lenient standard for amending pleadings under Rule 15(a) should relax the strict requirements for vacating a judgment.
Question presented
Does Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6)’s stringent standard apply to a post-judgment request to vacate for the purpose of filing an amended complaint?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / Decision released Jun 5, 2025
- Area
Decided Supreme Court case
Documents
Related cases




Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary-source trail available.
- Note
- Plain-English explainer. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Mar 30, 2026
- Method
- Methodology
Primary materials8
Supreme Court docket 23-1259
docket | Mar 30, 2026
Primary case document
Supreme Court document | Mar 30, 2026
CourtListener docket record
docket | Mar 30, 2026
Questions Presented
brief | Mar 8, 2026
Honickman
opinion | Jun 5, 2025
opinion
opinion | Jun 5, 2025
Oral Arguments - Honickman
audio | Mar 3, 2025
Petition
brief | May 29, 2024