To file a motion for fraud upon the court, you ask the court that entered the judgment to vacate it under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d)(3), alleging with particularity that an officer of the court — typically an attorney — corrupted the judicial process itself, and you back that allegation with clear and convincing evidence in a sworn filing served on every opposing party. It is one of the hardest claims to win in civil litigation. Courts treat it as a last resort, not a second chance at a bad result, and the bar is high because the accusation strikes at the integrity of the judiciary.
Make Sure Your Facts Actually Qualify
Fraud upon the court is not the same as lying, hiding a document, or cheating in discovery. The misconduct has to attack the process itself, and it almost always must involve an officer of the court: an attorney, judge, juror, or other court-appointed official. A party’s own dishonesty, even serious dishonesty, usually does not rise to this level unless an attorney actively participated in or orchestrated the scheme.
Conduct that typically qualifies:
- Bribing a judge or juror, or any payment or influence directed at a decision-maker.
- An attorney fabricating, altering, or knowingly presenting forged documents.
- A non-lawyer impersonating counsel in the proceedings.
- An attorney coordinating the suppression of evidence the court ordered produced, as part of a broader scheme to manipulate the outcome.
Conduct that generally does not qualify, even when it feels egregious: a witness lying on the stand, standing alone, is not fraud upon the court. Perjury by a non-attorney witness is handled through cross-examination, impeachment, and potentially criminal prosecution. A single intentional failure to produce a document in discovery also falls short unless it was part of a larger attorney-orchestrated scheme. This is where most of these motions die: the filer has evidence of bad behavior but not the systemic corruption of the process that courts require.
Pick the Right Rule: 60(b)(3) or 60(d)(3)
Rule 60 gives you two different routes, and confusing them can sink the motion.
Rule 60(b)(3) covers ordinary litigation fraud by an opposing party — lying, hiding evidence, misconduct that affected the outcome. It has a one-year deadline from the judgment. Miss the window and relief under 60(b)(3) is gone.
Rule 60(d)(3) is the fraud-upon-the-court provision. It preserves the court’s inherent power to vacate a judgment when the judicial process itself has been corrupted, and it has no fixed deadline. The tradeoff is a much higher bar: you must show that an officer of the court participated in conduct that corrupted the judicial machinery. Courts are explicit that 60(d)(3) is not a workaround for a missed 60(b)(3) deadline. If your real grievance is that the other side lied and you are past a year, relabeling it will not work.1Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 60 – Relief from a Judgment or Order
In many cases the motion is filed in the original case, asking the court to exercise its inherent power under Rule 60(d)(3). When significant time has passed, the same claim can be raised through an independent action — essentially a new lawsuit to set aside the judgment, with its own complaint and filing fee. If you are unsure which vehicle fits, this is a good point to consult an attorney.
Gather Evidence That Meets the Clear and Convincing Standard
Most courts require clear and convincing evidence. That sits above the “more likely than not” civil standard and just below “beyond a reasonable doubt.” In practice, the judge must come away with a firm conviction that the fraud actually happened, not a suspicion or a plausible theory.
Evidence that carries weight tends to be concrete and independently verifiable:
- Emails, texts, or letters between the attorney and party discussing fabrication or concealment.
- Bank statements, wire transfers, or payment records showing bribes or payments tied to the fraud.
- The fabricated evidence itself, ideally supported by forensic analysis of the document or digital file.
- Affidavits from people with firsthand knowledge — someone who witnessed the fabrication or was asked to participate.
Circumstantial evidence alone rarely wins. The judge needs a direct connection between the officer of the court and the corrupt act. Speculation, inconsistencies in testimony, or facts that have innocent explanations will not clear the bar.
If You Need Post-Judgment Discovery
Evidence of fraud upon the court often surfaces after the case is over. You may need the court’s permission to take limited post-judgment discovery — targeted depositions, document requests, or subpoenas. Courts have discretion to allow this when you make a threshold showing that fraud may have occurred. Present what you already have, explain specifically what the discovery would reveal, and show why you cannot get it any other way.
Draft the Motion
Start with a caption: the court’s name, the case title, and the case number. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) requires fraud allegations to be pled “with particularity.” Vague accusations will not survive. For every factual claim, identify who did what, when, where, and how the conduct constitutes fraud upon the court. Attach every piece of supporting evidence as an exhibit and reference each exhibit specifically in the body of the motion.
Include a specific request for relief. Ask for what you actually want — vacating the judgment, dismissal of the opposing party’s claims, a new trial — rather than generic “appropriate relief.”
Sign the motion, and support the factual assertions with a sworn statement: an affidavit or a verification signed under penalty of perjury. This is not optional. It tells the court you personally stand behind the facts, not just the legal argument. Notarizing an affidavit typically costs between $2 and $25 depending on your state.
File and Serve
File with the clerk of the court that entered the original judgment. Many federal courts accept electronic filing through CM/ECF, which generates a notice of filing automatically. If you file on paper, bring the original plus copies for the court and for service on the other parties.
Serve the motion and every supporting document on all opposing parties. In federal court, service of a motion in an existing case is governed by Rule 5. Keep proof of service and file it with the court. A motion filed without proof of service can be struck or ignored.
Do Not Wait Once You Know
Rule 60(d)(3) has no fixed deadline, but that does not mean you can wait indefinitely. Courts apply laches: unreasonable delay that prejudices the other side can bar the claim. There is no bright line. What matters is when you discovered or should have discovered the fraud, how quickly you moved after discovery, and whether time has made it harder for the opposing party to defend.
File as soon as you have enough evidence. Every month of unexplained delay after learning of the fraud gives the other side an argument. If a legitimate reason slowed you down, such as waiting for forensic analysis of a suspected forgery, document that reason so you can explain the timeline.
What the Court Can Do If You Win
A court that finds fraud upon the court has broad power to fashion a remedy. The Supreme Court held in Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co. that courts can vacate their own judgments when fraud has been practiced upon them. Common outcomes:
- Vacating the judgment entirely, as if it had never been entered, which can include unwinding transfers of money or property made under it.
- Dismissing the offending party’s case with prejudice, so it cannot be refiled.
- Ordering the party that committed the fraud to pay the other side’s attorney’s fees and costs. The Supreme Court confirmed in Chambers v. NASCO that federal courts have inherent power to assess fees against a party that has practiced fraud upon the court.
- Referring involved attorneys to the state bar for discipline, which can lead to suspension or disbarment, and referring the underlying conduct for criminal prosecution where it amounts to bribery, obstruction, or a similar offense.
Know the Risks Before You File
If the motion is denied, the original judgment stands. The exposure can go further. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires every filing to be supported by evidence and not presented for an improper purpose. A court that finds your claim frivolous or brought in bad faith can impose sanctions, including ordering you to pay the opposing party’s attorney’s fees for responding to the motion.2Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 11 – Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions
Rule 11 has a safe harbor worth knowing. When the other side moves for sanctions, they must serve the motion on you at least 21 days before filing it with the court. During that window you can withdraw or correct the challenged filing and avoid sanctions. The safe harbor does not apply when the court raises sanctions on its own.
Beyond formal sanctions, a meritless fraud-upon-the-court accusation damages your credibility with the judge. If you have ongoing litigation or future motions in the same case, a judge who saw your last filing as a bad-faith attack on opposing counsel will remember it. If your facts point to ordinary litigation misconduct rather than corruption of the process itself, the better path is usually a motion under Rule 60(b)(3), assuming you are still within the one-year window, or a motion for sanctions against the attorney under the appropriate rule.