UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CHAFFEE et al

Filing 63

ORDER Denying Defendant's 59 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (KWin)

Case 1:18-cv-11559-TLL-PTM ECF No. 63, PageID.602 Filed 12/09/20 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
NORTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v

Case No. 18-11559
Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

RANDY J. CHAFFEE
STATE OF MICHIGAN
OTSEGO COUNTY,
Defendants.
__________________________________________/
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
This matter is before the Court pursuant to Defendant Randy J. Chaffee’s Motion for
Reconsideration. ECF No. 59. On September 15, 2020, judgment was entered against Defendant
Randy J. Chaffee in the amount of $169,406.98, ECF No. 55, consistent with the Order Granting
Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment entered on March 31, 2020. ECF No. 46.
Defendant now seeks reconsideration of this Court’s order denying as moot Defendant’s postjudgment motion to dismiss. ECF No. 57. As previously explained, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
was not only mooted by the Judgment but was his “third such motion since the case began—all of
which recite[d] the meritless allegation that [Defendant’s] residence is outside the United States
of America.” Id. at PageID.568.
Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(h), a party may move for reconsideration of a prior order. A
motion for reconsideration will be granted if the moving party shows “(1) a palpable defect, (2)
the defect misled the court and the parties, and (3) that correcting the defect will result in a different
disposition of the case.” Michigan Dept. of Treasury v. Michalec, 181 F. Supp. 2d 731, 733–34
(E.D. Mich. 2002) (quoting E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(h)(3)). Defendant identifies no palpable defect in

Case 1:18-cv-11559-TLL-PTM ECF No. 63, PageID.603 Filed 12/09/20 Page 2 of 2

this Court’s order. Instead, he restates the same frivolous “sovereign citizen” rhetoric that this
Court has rejected repeatedly. See ECF No. 59 at PageID.582 (“Plaintiff has not provided any
evidence that . . . this court of limited jurisdiction has gained personam jurisdiction over the
[Defendant].”). Simply put, “an individual’s belief that her status as a ‘sovereign citizen’ puts her
beyond the jurisdiction of the courts has no conceivable validity in American law.” Charlotte v.
Hansen, 433 F. App’x 660, 661 (10th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant Randy J. Chaffee’s Motion for
Reconsideration, ECF No. 59, is DENIED.

Dated: December 9, 2020

s/Thomas L. Ludington
THOMAS L. LUDINGTON
United States District Judge

PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served
upon each attorney of record herein by electronic means and upon
Randy J. Chaffee, at 1794 McGregor Road, Vanderbilt, MI 49795 first
class U.S. mail on December 9, 2020.
s/Kelly Winslow
KELLY WINSLOW, Case Manager

-2-