Albritton v. Snead et al

Filing 33

MEMORANDUM OPINION. See Opinion for details. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 03/14/2016. Copy sent to Plaintiff as directed.(ccol, )

IN THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

MAR i 5 2016

Richmond Division

MORRIS ALBRITTON,

CLGflK. U.S. DiSTfliCT C0UR1
RICHMOND, VA

Plaintiff,
V.

Civil Action No.

MRS. S. SNEAD, ^

3:14CV558

al.,

Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on October 2,
the

to

Court

dismissed Morris

state

5793708,
the

a

claim.

at *1-4

Court

Albritton's

Albritton v.

{E.D.

received

Va.

from

Oct.

civil

Snead,

2,

Albritton

No.

2015) .
a

action

3:14CV558,

failure

2015

On October 19,

Motion

to

Alter

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e)
Motion," ECF No.

for

2015,

WL

2015,

or

Amend

("Rule 59(e)

28).

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

recognizes three grounds for relief under Rule 59(e):
accommodate

an

account

for

correct

a

intervening

new

clear

Hutchinson

v.

F.R.D.

(D.

Md.

625,

626

in

controlling

evidence

not

error

law or prevent

Staton,

of
994

(citing Weyerhaeuser Corp.
1419

change

1991) ;

F.2d

v.

Atkins

(S.D. Miss.

available

1076,

Koppers
v.

at

Marathon

1990)).

to

law;

(2)

to

or

(3)

to

trial;

manifest

1081

Co.,

"(1)

771

(4th

F.

injustice."
Cir.

1993)

Supp.

1406,

LeTourneau

Co.,

130

Albritton fails to identify

a

ground

for

relief pursuant

to Rule

59(e).

Instead,

he now

claims that his constitutional rights were violated because the

institution tampered with his

mail

and vaguely reargues

money was improperly taken from his inmate account.

that

However,

a

"Rule 59(e) motion may not be used to relitigate old matters, or

to

raise

arguments

or

present

evidence

that

raised prior to the entry of judgment."
Nat'l Fire Ins.

Co.,

148 F.3d 396,

403

11 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R.
Procedure

to

§

2810.1,

demonstrate

a

at 127-28

clear

(ECF No.

To

the

injunction
being

"to

Albritton

stop
in

v. Am.
(quoting

Federal Practice and

1995)).

of

or

law

Co.

been

Albritton fails

any

other

Accordingly,

basis

for

the Rule 59(e)

will be denied.

extent

placed

access,"

28)

Ins.

have

(4th Cir. 1998)

Miller,

granting relief under Rule 59(e).
Motion

Pac.

(2d ed.

error

could

a

VADOC

from

special

(Rule 59(e)

Mot.

seeks

relief

withholding

savings

H 3)

in

account

the

money
I

am

form

of

an

percentages
unable

to

this request will be denied as

moot as his civil action had been dismissed.

The

Clerk

is

directed

to

send

a

copy

of

the

Memorandum

Opinion to Albritton.

M
Robert E. Payne
Senior United States District Judge

Richmond, Virginia