Williams v. Sampson et al

Filing 36

MINUTE ORDER denying Plaintiff's 35 Motion for Reconsideration. Authorized by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Kirk Williams, Prisoner ID: 879031)(PM)

Download PDF
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 KIRK WILLIAMS, 10 11 12 13 Plaintiff, CASE NO. C17-0092-JCC MINUTE ORDER v. CYNTHIA SAMPSON and SHORELINE POLICE DEPARTMENT, 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 18 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge: This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Kirk Williams’s motion for 19 reconsideration (Dkt. No. 35) of the Court’s order (Dkt. No. 33) granting Defendants’ motion to 20 dismiss (Dkt. No. 5). 21 Motions for reconsideration are generally disfavored. W.D. Wash. Local Civ. R. 7(h)(1). 22 Reconsideration is appropriate only where there is “manifest error in the prior ruling or a 23 showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to [the Court’s] 24 attention earlier with reasonable diligence.” Id. “Motions for reconsideration are not the place 25 for parties to make new arguments or to ask the Court to rethink what it has already thought.” 26 Richard v. Kelsey, 2009 WL 3762844 at *1 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 9, 2009). MINUTE ORDER C17-0092-JCC PAGE - 1 1 The Court dismissed all of Williams’s claims, finding that the statute of limitations barred 2 his suit. (Dkt. No. 5 at 3.) Williams’s motion cites various general authorities as to statutes of 3 limitations. (Dkt. No. 35 at 4.) His only argument is that the Court “must apply Utah’s 4 year 4 statute of limitation for personal injury claims.” (See id. at 5.) 5 However, for claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Court applies the forum state’s statute 6 of limitations for personal injury actions. See Wilson v. Garcia, 471 US 261, 280 (1985). Here, 7 the forum state is Washington. Moreover, the Court already concluded that, even if the statute of 8 limitations was four years, Williams’s suit was untimely. (Dkt. No. 33 at 2-3.) 9 Williams has not shown manifest error in the Court’s prior ruling. The motion for 10 reconsideration (Dkt. No. 35) is DENIED. 11 DATED this 2nd day of May 2017. 12 William M. McCool Clerk of Court 13 s/Paula McNabb Deputy Clerk 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 MINUTE ORDER C17-0092-JCC PAGE - 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?