Sharmus Darcel Evans v. Johnson County District Attorney, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Kansas denied Sharmus Darcel Evans’s motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of his pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Treating the motion as one under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), the court found no intervening change in law, newly available evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice.

Holdings

1. A motion for reconsideration filed within 28 days after entry of judgment is treated as a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
2. Relief under Rule 59(e) was not warranted because Plaintiff did not identify an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice, and his submission did not cure the deficiencies supporting dismissal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's timely motion for reconsideration should be treated as a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
2. Whether Plaintiff established an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice warranting alteration or amendment of the dismissal order and judgment.

Disposition

other