Yet another in the never-ending tale where stipulation brings capitulation is Norman W. Bascomb, Docket No. 19317-18L, filed 9/3/20.

Norm petitioned five (count ’em, five) years’ worth of NITLs, but as trial loomed, stiped out all of them. Thirty-two days after the stip, Norm moves for vacation per Rule 162.

Norm says “… that he had been hospitalized and suffers from various health problems, and that he misunderstood the effect of the decision document.” Order, at p.2.

Judge Nega: “While the Court may be sympathetic to petitioner’s health problems and although petitioner may have been confused in respect to the effect of the Court’s Decision entered January 23, 2020, petitioner has not shown any proper basis for the Court to relieve him of that Decision, nor has he shown any substantial error or mistake by this Court in reaching its Decision entered January 23, 2020, that might support a different outcome in this case. Confusion by one party as to the procedural effect of signing a stipulated decision does not rise to a level similar to lack of formal consent, mutual mistake, fraud, or another similar ground.” Order, at p. 2.

The last sentence of the immediately preceding paragraph should appear in every stipulation.