AVT Nevada LP v. Christopher McAlary

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Utah denied Christopher McAlary’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend judgment in a breach-of-contract action involving a personal guaranty for bitcoin-kiosk equipment leases. The court held that McAlary merely reasserted previously addressed arguments, failed to establish qualifying newly discovered evidence or clear error, and improperly raised frustration of purpose for the first time.

Holdings

1. Reconsideration was not warranted because McAlary merely reargued issues concerning AVT's alleged breach that had already been presented and decided.
2. Reconsideration was not warranted because McAlary failed to show clear error in the court's determination that any breach by AVT was immaterial.
3. The bankruptcy-case answer did not qualify as newly discovered evidence because McAlary knew of it before the summary-judgment ruling and did not diligently bring it to the court's attention.
4. The court would not consider McAlary's frustration-of-purpose argument because it was a new argument that could have been raised when the original summary-judgment motion was briefed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether McAlary established a valid ground under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend the judgment based on alleged clear error.
2. Whether an answer filed in Cash Cloud's bankruptcy case constituted newly discovered evidence warranting reconsideration.
3. Whether McAlary could assert frustration of purpose for the first time in a Rule 59(e) motion.

Disposition

other