The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Wednesday in favor of a former Halliburton employee seeking to reopen his lawsuit after he voluntarily dismissed it.
Justices discussed whether a voluntary dismissal can qualify for special judicial relief and reopening, even if the statute of limitations would normally prevent it.
Under the right circumstances, and in this case, they can.
Gary Waetzig sued his former employer, Halliburton Energy Services Inc., for age discrimination in February 2020 in the U. S. District Court for the District of Colorado.
Waetzig was 66 years old at the time of his termination, and was employed as part of Halliburton’s Rocky Mountain Region. He was an account leader and reported to the company’s Eaton office in northern Colorado. Waetzig is a resident of Wyoming.
In response to his complaint, Halliburton asserted the claims were subject to arbitration. However, rather than oppose the company’s arbitration petition, Waetzig, dismissed his federal case voluntarily without prejudice in April 2020.
After losing at arbitration, Waetzig asked the District Court to reopen his dismissed lawsuit and vacate the arbitration award in September 2021.
However, based on court documents, he had to prove his intentions to the District Court as they were questioning his actions.
“Waetzig’s next move was procedurally creative,” court documents stated.
“He (Waetzig) filed a motion under the old docket number and asked the court to reopen that case and vacate the arbitration award.”
Waetzig argued the District Court could reopen the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60.
Rule 60 allows a court grounds for relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding in cases of reasonable mistake, accident, surprise, or excusable neglect.
The District Court agreed with Waetzig and reopened the case in January 2022, finding that a voluntary dismissal without prejudice counts as a “final proceeding” and that Waetzig made a mistake when he dismissed his case rather than seeking a stay.
The District Court separately granted Waetzig’s motion to vacate the arbitration award.
Halliburton appealed. Among other things, it argued that a voluntary dismissal without prejudice does not count as a “final judgment, order, or proceeding,” and therefore falls outside the reach of Rule 60.
However, the Supreme Court’s ruling overturned the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit that had denied Waetzig the opportunity to revive his age discrimination case.
“For nearly seven years, we went toe-to-toe against Halliburton, and today’s 9-0 ruling validates that effort,” said Spencer Kontnik, founding partner and attorney at Kontnik and Cohen and a member of Waetzig’s legal team, in an email response to The Post.
“This decision reaches far beyond employment and arbitration cases — it applies to all federal cases where Rule 60(b) is asserted and will likely influence state courts that have adopted parallel provisions, as most have.”
Kontnik said he has been Waetzig’s counsel at arbitration, at the district court level, at the 10th Circuit and at the Supreme Court.
Kontnik, along with attorney Austin Cohen, co-counseled with Holwell Shuster & Goldberg for the Supreme Court arguments.
“Although the Court’s decision marks a decisive victory, the fight is not over,” Kontnik said.
“The case now returns to the Tenth Circuit, where we will continue to advocate for Mr. Waetzig.”
Halliburton’s attorneys did not respond to The Post for comment regarding the ruling.