Kamakeeaina v. City & County of Honolulu et al
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION re 49 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 10/29/12. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Buddy Kamakeeiana served by first class mail at the address of record on October 29, 2012.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU,
NO. 1:11-cv-00770 SOM/RLP
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
On October 3, 2012, the court denied Plaintiff’s Motion
for Preliminary Injunction, ECF #34-1, seeking reinstatement of
the medical and psychological care that he had received at the
Federal Detention Center-Honolulu (“FDC”), after his transfer to
the Halawa Correctional Facility (“HCF”).
Preliminary Inj., ECF #46.
See Order Den. Mot.
Plaintiff moves for reconsideration,
arguing that an HCF psychological social worker (“PSW”)
incorrectly completed his post admission mental health evaluation
Plaintiff’s Motion is DENIED.
A successful motion for reconsideration must
demonstrate some reason that the court should reconsider its
prior decision and set forth facts or law of a strongly
convincing nature to induce the court to reverse its prior
White v. Sabatino, 424 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1274 (D. Haw.
Three grounds justify reconsideration: (1) an intervening
change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence;
and (3) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest
Id. (citing Mustafa v. Clark County Sch. Dist., 157
F.3d 1169, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 1998)).
Local Rule LR60.1 for the
District of Hawaii implements these standards for reconsideration
of interlocutory orders.
Plaintiff states that, on August 30, 2012, HCF PSW
Denise M. Chun incorrectly noted that Plaintiff answered “yes” to
whether he had been convicted of a sexual offense, although Chun
noted “Appeals” next to this question.
See Pl.’s Exh. B2C-B2D,
Plaintiff says that Chun scratched out his “no”
response to the question after their interview.
received a copy of the report, he noticed the discrepancy.
On September 18, 2012, Plaintiff sent a medical request
to speak with the HCF Psychiatrist or Medical Director to correct
On September 19, 2012, Plaintiff spoke with
HCF PSW Flo Magallanes, who investigated the incident.
day, Chun submitted a new post admissions mental health
assessment record that corrects the discrepancy and reflects that
Plaintiff answered “no” to having been convicted of a sexual
See ECF #49-7.
Plaintiff complains that Chun violated
Hawaii state law and seeks reconsideration of the order denying
him injunctive relief based on this clerical mistake.
Plaintiff’s claims, while no doubt upsetting to him, do
not constitute an intervening change in controlling law or new
evidence, and do not support the need to correct clear error by
the court or prevent manifest injustice.
The record shows that
Plaintiff has been evaluated, examined by a physician and
psychiatrist, and is being treated for his mental health issues
Plaintiff still disagrees with the medication he is
receiving and is angry with Ms. Chun for her alleged failure to
correctly record his responses to her questions.
error and continuing disagreement with the course of treatment,
however, do not give rise to a § 1983 claim, nor provide a basis
for granting Plaintiff injunctive relief.
See Franklin v. State
of Or., State Welfare Div., 662 F.2d 1337, 1344 (9th Cir. 1981).
Plaintiff fails to establish that he is likely to
succeed on the merits or suffer irreparable harm if he is not
granted an injunction based on his now-corrected mental health
evaluation form, or that the balance of equities tips in his
favor and an injunction is in the public interest.
Motion for Reconsideration does not set forth facts or law of a
strongly convincing nature persuading this court to reverse its
decision to deny him preliminary injunctive relief.
Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, October 29, 2012.
/s/ Susan Oki Mollway
Susan Oki Mollway
Chief United States District Judge
Kamakeeaina v. City and County of Honolulu, et al., 1:11-cv-00770 SOM-RLP;
Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration; G:\docs\joni\000 CMECF.emailed for
filing\2012 emailed for filing\10.29 Kamakeeaina 11-770 som (LR 60.1, inj.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?