Garcia v. State of Texas et al

Filing 152

ORDER Denying 149 Motion for Reconsideration.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4)

Download PDF
United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION DENISE GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. HARRIS COUNTY, et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § December 20, 2018 David J. Bradley, Clerk CIVIL ACTION H-16-2134 ORDER Pending before the court is defendant Harris County’s motion for reconsideration. Dkt. 149. Plaintiff Denise Garcia responded. Dkt. 151. Having considered the motion, response, and applicable law, the court is of the opinion that the motion should be DENIED. “[A] motion to alter or amend the judgment under Rule 59(e) ‘must clearly establish either a manifest error of law or fact or must present newly discovered evidence.’” Rosenzweig v. Azurix Corp., 332 F.3d 854, 863 (5th Cir. 2003) (quoting Simon v. United States, 891 F.2d 1154, 1159 (5th Cir. 1990)). Harris County does not argue that the court’s prior judgment rests on a manifest error of law or fact. Harris County also does not present newly discovered evidence. Instead, Harris County reframes its argument in an attempt to correct legal errors in its own prior briefing. Dkt. 149. Thus, Harris County’s motion does not warrant Rule 59(e) relief. Moreover, even considering Harris County’s new argument, a genuine issue of material fact still exists as to District Attorney Devon Anderson’s knowledge of Garcia’s protected speech at the time Garcia was fired. See Dkt. 143 at 2–3. This prevents a finding as a matter of law that Garcia’s firing was not pretextual. See Envtl. Conservation Org. v. City of Dallas, 529 F.3d 519, 524 (5th Cir. 2008) (holding that the court must draw all justifiable inferences in favor of the non-movant). Thus, Harris County’s motion for reconsideration (Dkt. 149) is DENIED. Signed at Houston, Texas on December 20, 2018. ___________________________________ Gray H. Miller United States District Judge 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?