United States of America v. Winsper et al

Filing 106

ORDER denying 99 Defendants' Motion to Reconsider Memorandum Opinion and Order dated July 15, 2014. Signed by Senior Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 9/25/14. cc: Counsel(TG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
CIVIL ACTION NO. No. 3:08-CV-631-H
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

PLAINTIFF

v.
MALCOLM C. WINSPER, et al.,

DEFENDANTS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On July 15, 2014, this Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order which sustained
the Government’s motion for summary judgment, denied Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment and allowed the Government to move forward with foreclosure on the Winsper’s
residence in accordance with the United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677 (1983) and United
States v. Winsper, 680 F.3d 482 (6th Cir. 2012). On August 12, 2014, Defendants moved this
Court to alter or amend that Memorandum Opinion. They argued that the Court should
reconsider and re-evaluate its analysis under the Rodgers factors and under the directives
contained in the Sixth Circuit’s decision remanding the case to this Court. In doing so,
Defendants seem to be repeating many of their previous arguments recycled as objections to the
Court’s recent Memorandum Opinion.
In its Memorandum Opinion, the Court re-analyzed the four Rodgers factors individually
and as a balancing test to determine whether foreclosure was appropriate in this case. The Court
has reviewed its previous analysis and remains convinced that it accurately states the Court’s
analysis and supports the ultimate conclusion. Defendants argue that the Court should have
considered the second Rodgers factor to be of greater consequence than the others. The Court
does not believe that this is necessarily so in balancing all four factors. Nevertheless, the Court

did find two of the factors to clearly favor the Government and only the second factor to favor
Defendants. This finding did not change from the Court’s original Memorandum Opinion and
Order and was not sufficient for the Sixth Circuit to agree that it would outweigh all of the
factors.
The Court concludes that its July 15 Memorandum Opinion and Order accurately
analyzes the Rodgers factors and complies with the remand from the Sixth Circuit Court of
Appeals.
Being otherwise sufficiently advised,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to reconsider the Memorandum
Opinion and Order dated July 15, 2014, is DENIED.

September 25, 2014

cc:

Counsel of Record