No. 25-7013October Term 2025DismissedUpdated Sep 12, 2026
Fraud on the court
Peralta v. City of New York, New York
Case status
Where it stands
The case ended without a full Supreme Court ruling on the merits.
Question presented
1. Whether a federal district court may deny relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d)(3) without adjudicating properly raised allegations of fraud on the court that were presented before and after final judgment? 2. Whether* the mandate rule and claim preclusion bar consideration of Rule 60(d)(3) allegations where no court has issued findings resolving those allegations on their merits including after Appeal No. 24-1356? 3. Whether the Due Process Clause requires that properly raised allegations challenging the integrity of the judicial process receive adjudication on the merits rather than being declined through finality doctrines?
Timeline
Briefing
What it's about
The Supreme Court declined to review Robinson Peralta's challenge to the denial of post-judgment relief in his case against New York City. The Court did not decide the merits of his claims about alleged fraud on the court.
Impact
The denial leaves the Second Circuit's decision in place for Peralta and the City of New York. It does not resolve whether Rule 60(d)(3) requires courts to address similar allegations on their merits in other cases.
What's next
This Supreme Court proceeding has ended. Peralta's case remains governed by the Second Circuit decision that he asked the Court to review.
What did the Supreme Court do in Robinson Peralta v. City of New York?
The Court declined to review Peralta's petition. It did not decide the merits of his allegations or announce a rule about Rule 60(d)(3).
What was the core dispute in Robinson Peralta v. City of New York?
Peralta challenged the denial of requests to reopen a final judgment. He argued that allegations of fraud on the court should receive a merits decision.
What does Robinson Peralta v. City of New York mean for Peralta and New York City?
The Second Circuit result remains in effect for Peralta and the City. The Supreme Court's denial did not declare either side correct on the legal questions.
Is Rule 60(d)(3) still the law after Robinson Peralta v. City of New York?
Yes. The Court's denial did not change Rule 60(d)(3) or create a new Supreme Court rule about fraud on the court.
Documents
Activity
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.