Summary
The District Court of Guam issued a decision and order denying the plaintiff's motion to set aside judgment, construing it as a motion for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). The court also resolved the defendants' request for attorneys' fees and costs as sanctions under Rule 11, applying a lodestar calculation and adjusting the hours to exclude work on unrelated litigation. The order fixes the sanction amount at $19,375.63 and directs the plaintiff to remit payment within sixty days following the Ninth Circuit's resolution of the appeal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether plaintiff's filing titled "Set Aside Judgment" should be construed as a Rule 59(e) motion.
- Whether plaintiff established newly discovered evidence, clear error, or an intervening change in controlling law warranting alteration or amendment of the judgment.
- Whether the filing of plaintiff's notice of appeal deprived the district court of authority to resolve the motion and determine the amount of sanctions.
- Whether plaintiff was entitled to transfer his claims to the Ninth Circuit or another district.
- Whether defendants established reasonable attorneys' fees and costs recoverable as Rule 11 sanctions.
Holdings
- A filing titled "Set Aside Judgment," submitted eight days after the order at issue, was properly construed as a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
- A Rule 59(e) motion may be granted only when the movant presents newly discovered evidence, demonstrates clear error, or identifies an intervening change in controlling law; it may not be used to relitigate matters or raise arguments that could have been presented before judgment.
- The filing of plaintiff's notice of appeal did not prevent the district court from resolving the Rule 59(e) motion or addressing the outstanding determination of reasonable sanctions while appellate proceedings were held in abeyance under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4).
- Plaintiff was not entitled to an order transferring all of his claims to the Ninth Circuit or another district because he supplied no adequate grounds for transfer and no authority permitting the requested relief.
- Defendants established reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of $19,375.63 as sanctions, consisting of $19,375.00 for 77.50 hours at $250 per hour and $0.63 in postage costs.
Key quotations
“Rule 59(e) is an “extraordinary remedy, to be used sparingly in the interests of finality and conservation of judicial resources.”” (at 3)
“A Rule 59(e) motion may only be granted if it “is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or there is an intervening change in the controlling law.”” (at 3-4)
“Therefore, the court will not adjust the $19,375.00 in attorneys’ fees claimed by Defendants.” (at 11)
Factual background
Plaintiff repeatedly filed documents challenging previously litigated matters, which the court characterized as meritless and imposing unnecessary costs on defendants and the court. The court had previously found that plaintiff failed to adequately support diversity jurisdiction because he did not demonstrate that he was domiciled in Florida when the complaint was filed, while defendants provided substantial evidence that he was domiciled in Guam. Defendants submitted a fee declaration seeking $19,438.13 for defending the action; the court excluded $62.50 attributable to a different case and awarded $19,375.63 in fees and postage costs.
Procedural history
The district court previously adopted a report and recommendation, denied plaintiff's objections and Rule 59 motion, and granted defendants' motion for Rule 11 sanctions, leaving the amount of fees and costs to be determined. Plaintiff appealed and then filed the present motion. The court denied reconsideration, granted defendants' request for entry of an order, and fixed reasonable attorneys' fees and costs at $19,375.63, subject to issuance of a separate payment order after resolution of the appeal or a remand by the Ninth Circuit.
Remand instructions
No remand was ordered. After resolution of plaintiff's Ninth Circuit appeal, the district court will issue a separate order requiring payment of $19,375.63 within sixty days if the appeal is remanded for a sanctions determination or the district court's sanctions order is affirmed.