Williamson v. County of Johnson et al

Filing 15

ORDER denying 12 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 10/1/2018. (pts)

FILED
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
AUGUSTA L1IV.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COXJRT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

20I8OCT-I PH |:56

DUBLIN DIVISION

CLERK
SO.DIST. 0

DOUGLAS BRITT WILLIAMSON,

Plaintiff,
CV 318-041

V.

COUNTY OF JOHNSON; DEPT.
GEORGIA CORRECTION; KEITH
MILNER; MARTHA WALSH; JIMMY
HENSLEY; COUNTY OF BARTOW;
WARDEN ANTOINE CALDWELL;

JOHNSON STATE PRISON,
Defendants.

ORDER

Pending

before

reconsideration.

the

Court

(Doc. No. 12.)

is

Plaintiff's

motion

for

Plaintiff's motion asks the Court

to reconsider its Order entered August 28, 2018, that dismissed
his

claim

without

prejudice.

For

the

following

reasons.

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED.

Plaintiff

filed

the

instant

action

on

June

5,

2018,

and

simultaneously filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis C'lFP").
(Doc. Nos. 1, 2.)

The

United States Magistrate

Judge granted

Plaintiff's motion to proceed IFP and ordered Plaintiff to submit
his Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement ("Account Statement")
and

Consent to

Collection

Form") within thirty days.

of

Fees from

Trust Account

(Doc. No. 4, at 3.)

("Consent

Plaintiff did not

comply with this Order, despite being warned that failure to submit
the documents would cause

his case to be dismissed.

He did,

however, submit his Account Statement thirteen days late.

(Doc.

No. 7.)

On July 16, 2018, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and
Recommendation C'R&R") that Plaintiff's case be dismissed without

prejudice for failure to submit the necessary documents.
No. 5.)

(Doc.

Plaintiff objected to that R&R on the grounds that the

Business Office

at

Johnson

State Prison

withheld the documents

from him and is solely to blame for the late submission.

The Court

considered those objections and overruled them in an Order entered

August 28, 2018.

(Doc. No. 10.)

The Court noted that Plaintiff

still had not submitted his Consent Form that was provided to him
by the Magistrate Judge on June 7th.

Now Plaintiff asks the Court to reconsider its prior decision.

Plaintiff repeats the same arguments he made in his objection to

the R&R, namely that the Business Office at Johnson State Prison
withheld documents from him for multiple weeks.
in

the

motion,

the

Court

will

construe

Although not cited
the

motion

for

reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59.

A motion for reconsideration of a civil judgment may be filed
within twenty-eight days of entry of the judgment.

Pro. 59(e).

Fed. R. Civ.

""^The only grounds for granting a rule 59(e) motion

are newly discovered evidence or manifest error of law or fact."

Arthur v. King, 500 F.3d 1335, 1343 (11^^ Cir. 2007). A Rule 59(e)
motion is not intended as a vehicle to re-litigate old matters,

raise new arguments, or present evidence that could have been

raised prior to the entry of judgment.

Michael Linet, Inc. v.

Village of Wellington, Fla., 408 F.3d 757, 763 (11^^ Cir. 2005).

Accompanying Plaintiff's motion are two documents, an updated
Account Statement and a Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis form.

(Doc. Nos. 13, 14.)

Plaintiff submitted the IFP form in lieu of

a Consent Form, claiming that was the only document available to
him.

An IFP form, however, cannot act as a substitute for a

Consent Form.

Moreover, a Consent Form was provided to Plaintiff

with the Magistrate Judge's June 7th Order.

(Doc. No. 4.)

By

submitting his Account Statement twice. Plaintiff has demonstrated
the

ability

to

provide

the

Court

with

requested

regardless of issues with the Business Office.

documents,

Thus, his repeated

failure to submit the Consent Form cannot be excused.

Because

Plaintiff repeats the same arguments already made, his motion
presents no newly discovered evidence, nor has he demonstrated any
error

of

law

or

fact.

As

such.

Plaintiff's

motion

for

reconsideration is denied.

The Court notes that dismissal of Plaintiff's claim is without

prejudice and nothing in this Order or prior Orders puts any
additional restrictions on him pursuing this claim in a new case.

Plaintiff must simply be willing to comply with the instructions
of this Court in a complete and timely fashion.

Upon

due

consideration.

Plaintiff s

motion

for

reconsideration (doc. no. 12) is DENIED.

ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, this

fay of October,

2018.

UNIT-ED STATES mSTRICT JUDGE