Tony Marcelli (plaintiff) initially brought suit for a dispute involving an indemnification agreement. The Oakland County Circuit Court ruled against Marcelli and the Michigan Supreme Court denied review. Marcelli then filed a second suit, looking to set aside the judgment against him. The Oakland County Circuit Court granted summary judgment against Marcelli due to res judicata, and the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed. Marcelli then filed a third suit, this time in federal court, alleging a number of causes of action against multiple defendants. The district court ordered Marcelli to file a Case Statement affirming that the causes of action complied with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Instead Marcelli’s counsel filed a response stating that the actions were filed under an erroneous belief that they complied with Rule 11 and stipulating that the case should be dismissed. The district court therefore dismissed the case with prejudice based on the stipulation. Sixteen months later, Marcelli filed a motion to reopen the case on the grounds that his counsel had acted without his consent in filing the stipulation. The district court denied the motion to reopen. Marcelli filed an appeal based on Rule 60(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.