GOGUEN v. GILBLAIR et al
Filing
189
DECISION AND ORDER denying 180 Motion for Reconsideration. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN C. NIVISON. (MFS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
ROBERT GOGUEN,
Plaintiff,
v.
JENNIFER GILBLAIR, et al.,
Defendants
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1:12-cv-00048-JCN
DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR RECONSIERATION
Plaintiff asks the Court to reconsider its order denying Plaintiff’s motion for relief
from judgment. (Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 180.) Plaintiff contends that
reconsideration is appropriate in part because he believes the Court might not have received
all of the record evidence he submitted in support of the motion.
To be entitled to relief on his motion for reconsideration, Plaintiff must demonstrate
(1) the availability of new evidence not previously available, (2) an intervening change in
controlling law, or (3) the need to correct a clear error of law or to prevent manifest
injustice. Int’l Ass’n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers v. Verso Corp., 121 F. Supp. 3d
201, 217 (D. Me. 2015).
Through his motion for reconsideration, Plaintiff maintains the Court did not have
the portions of the trial transcript he submitted to demonstrate that certain defendants
(Allen, Plourd, Bugbee, and Rizzo) presented perjured testimony at trial. First, regardless
of whether the Court received the documents Plaintiff intended to file, the transcript of the
individuals identified in Plaintiff’s motion was filed on the Court’s docket in September
2016. (Trial Tr., ECF No. 154.) Furthermore, none of the information filed by or cited by
Plaintiff constitutes evidence that was not previously available. Finally, Plaintiff has not
established a change in the relevant law, a clear error of law, or that reconsideration is
necessary to prevent a manifest injustice. Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion
for reconsideration. (ECF No. 180.)
/s/ John C. Nivison
U.S. Magistrate Judge
Dated this 21st day of May, 2018.
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?