Oral Argument: Coney Island Auto Parts v. Burton | Time Trap Tangle

Coney Island Auto Parts, Inc. v. Burton | Case No. 24-808 | Oral Argument Date: 11/5/25 | Docket Link: Here Overview Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Coney Island Auto Parts versus Burton, a time trap tangle examining when void verdicts gain validity. Coney Island's bank account gets frozen for nearly $100,000 based on a 2015 Tennessee judgment they claim they never knew about. When Coney finally fights back seven years later, the Sixth Circuit dismisses the case, saying that you waited too long to challenge the judgment Coney didn’t even know about. "If something never existed in the first place, does waiting too long to challenge it make it real? Question Presented: Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) imposes any time limit to set aside a void default judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction. Oral Advocates: For Petitioner (Coney): Daniel Ginzburg, Freehold, N.J. For Respondent (Burton): Lisa S. Blatt, Washington, D.C. Link to Opinion: TBD. Website Link to Opinion Summary: TBD. Website Link to Oral Argument: TBD. Timestamps: [00:00:00] Argument Preview [00:00:58] Argument Begins [00:01:07] Petitioner Opening Statement [00:03:17] Petitioner Free for All Questions [00:19:12] Petitioner Sequential Questions [00:19:15] Respondent Opening Statement [00:20:33] Respondent Free for All Questions [00:34:10] Petitioner Rebuttal