William Nelson, et al. v. Robert Dupree, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana denied pro se Plaintiff William Nelson’s motion for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). The court held that the motion merely rehashed previously presented evidence and legal theories and did not establish a manifest error, newly discovered evidence, manifest injustice, misconduct, or an intervening change in law.

Holdings

1. A motion filed within twenty-eight days of judgment that challenges the correctness of the judgment may be considered under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), even when the movant does not specify the procedural basis for reconsideration.
2. Reconsideration was not warranted because Plaintiff's motion merely rehashed evidence and legal theories and did not establish manifest error, newly discovered evidence, manifest injustice, serious misconduct, or a material intervening change in law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's motion should be treated as a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
2. Whether Plaintiff demonstrated a basis for the extraordinary remedy of reconsideration, including manifest error of law, newly discovered evidence, manifest injustice, serious misconduct, or an intervening change in law.

Disposition

other