Storm v. Correctional Medical Services P.A.'s A-Z et al
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration 92 is DENIED. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
Case No. 1:10-cv-00319-BLW
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
SERVICES, n/k/a CORIZON, INC.;
MICHAEL TAKAGI, P.A.; CATHY
FITZGERALD, P.A.; DR. LOIS
ADRIAN; DR. PATMAS; SETH
YOURKETTER, P.A.; CARTNEY
RICH; CONNIE SMOCK; ANITA
TRAVIS; LARRY L. HYNES; JAN
EPP; DIANA OBENAUER; AND JEFF
On September 18, 2013, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of
Defendants in this civil rights action. (Dkt. 90, 91.) Plaintiff has filed a motion to alter or
amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). (Dkt. 92.)
Reconsideration of a final judgment under Rule 59(e) is an “extraordinary remedy,
to be used sparingly in the interests of finality and conservation of judicial resources.”
Carroll v. Nakatani, 342 F.3d 934, 945 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks
omitted). A losing party cannot use a Rule 59(e) motion to relitigate old matters or to
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 1
raise arguments that could have been raised before the entry of judgment. See Sch. Dist.
No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). As a result,
there are four limited grounds upon which a motion for reconsideration may be granted:
(1) the motion is necessary to correct manifest errors of fact or law; (2) the moving party
presents newly discovered evidence; (3) reconsideration is necessary to prevent manifest
injustice; or (4) there is an intervening change in the law. Turner v. Burlington N. Santa
Fe R.R. Co., 338 F.3d 1058, 1063 (9th Cir. 2003).
Plaintiff’s Motion is nothing more than a disagreement with the Court’s legal
analysis and an attempt to relitigate the issues already decided against him. The Court
concludes that Plaintiff has failed to establish that he is entitled to relief under Rule 59(e).
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. 92) is
DATED: March 12, 2014
Honorable B. Lynn Winmill
Chief U. S. District Judge
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 2
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?