In Re: LLS America LLC (Kriegman v. Lazy M LLC) WAEB BK Adv Proceeding No 11-80125-PCW11

Filing 177

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL AND/OR TO AMEND JUDGMENT. Denying 176 Motion for New Trial. Signed by Chief Judge Rosanna Malouf Peterson. (SK, Case Administrator)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6 7 9 LLS AMERICA, LLC, Debtor, BRUCE P. KRIEGMAN, solely in his capacity as court-appointed Chapter 11 Trustee for LLS America, LLC, 10 Plaintiff, 8 11 NO: 2:12-CV-668-RMP ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL AND/OR TO AMEND JUDGMENT v. 12 LAZY M, LLC, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 BEFORE THE COURT is Defendant David Perry’s Motion for a New Trial 15 and/or to Amend Judgment, 1 ECF No. 176. The Court has reviewed the record and 16 is fully informed. 17 18 19 1 The Motion most closely resembles a Motion for a New Trial and/or to Amend 20 Judgment but Perry refers to his Motion as a “‘Notice of Fraud Before the Court’ 21 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL AND/OR TO AMEND JUDGMENT ~ 1 1 ANALYSIS 2 Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 59: 3 The court may, on motion, grant a new trial on all or some of the issues--and to any party--as follows: . . . . (B) after a nonjury trial, for any reason for which a rehearing has heretofore been granted in a suit in equity in federal court. 4 5 Following a nonjury trial and upon motion for a new trial, a court may “open the 6 judgment if one has been entered, take additional testimony, amend findings of fact 7 and conclusions of law or make new ones, and direct the entry of a new judgment.” 8 FED. R. CIV. P. 59. “There are three grounds for granting new trials in court-tried 9 actions under Rule 59(a)(2): (1) manifest error of law; (2) manifest error of fact; 10 and (3) newly discovered evidence.” Brown v. Wright, 588 F.2d 708, 710 (9th Cir. 11 1978) (citing 6A Moore's Federal Practice P 59.07 at 59-94). 12 In his current motion, Defendant David Perry seeks to re-litigate issues that 13 have already been determined at trial by presenting evidence that was previously 14 before this Court and has already been considered. Defendant’s different 15 interpretations of evidence that have already been considered by this Court are not 16 proper grounds for granting a new trial. He fails to provide this Court with 17 evidence of any error of fact or law or any newly discovered evidence. His claims 18 19 ‘Manifest Injustice’ Motion for New Trial as Necessary for Justice and/or 20 Amending Judgement.” 21 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL AND/OR TO AMEND JUDGMENT ~ 2 1 regarding “manifest injustice” are unpersuasive and this Court finds no good cause 2 to grant a new trial. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 4 1. 5 6 7 8 Defendant David Perry’s Motion for New Trial and/or to Amend Judgment, ECF No. 176, is DENIED. The District Court Clerk is directed to enter this Order and provide a copies to counsel. DATED this 9th day of December. 9 10 s/ Rosanna Malouf Peterson ROSANNA MALOUF PETERSON Chief United States District Court Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL AND/OR TO AMEND JUDGMENT ~ 3

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?