Caston v. Louisiana State Penitentiary

Filing 48

MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 47 Motion for Reconsideration re 46 Order on Motion for Reconsideration, Order on Motion for Hearing. Signed by Judge Robert G James on 10/21/16. (crt,DickersonSld, D)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MONROE DIVISION
JESSE JAMES CASTON

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-1119

VERSUS

JUDGE ROBERT G. JAMES

WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE
PENITENTIARY

MAG. JUDGE KAREN L.HAYES

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Pending before the Court is Petitioner Jesse James Caston’s (“Caston”) motion to alter or
amend judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) [Doc. No. 47]. Caston moves the
Court to set aside its October 7, 2016 Memorandum Order [Doc. No. 46].
Because a Rule 59(e) motion “calls into question the correctness of a judgment,” In re
Transtexas Gas Corp., 303 F.3d 571, 581 (5th Cir. 2002), it “is not the proper vehicle for rehashing
evidence, legal theories, or arguments that could have been offered or raised before the entry of
judgment.” Templet v. HydroChem Inc., 367 F.3d 473, 479 (5th Cir. 2004) (citing Simon v. United
States, 891 F.2d 1154, 1159 (5th Cir.1990)). Instead, the Fifth Circuit instructs that “Rule 59(e)
‘serve[s] the narrow purpose of allowing a party to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to
present newly discovered evidence.’” Id. (quoting Waltman v. Int'l Paper Co., 875 F.2d 468, 473
(5th Cir.1989) (internal quotations omitted)). “Reconsideration of a judgment after its entry is an
extraordinary remedy that should be used sparingly.” Id. (citations omitted).
Having reviewed and considered Caston’s motion, the Court finds no manifest errors of law
and fact in its previous order. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Caston’s motion [Doc. No. 47] is DENIED.

MONROE, LOUISIANA, this 21st day of October, 2016.

2