Marcus Lee Graham v. Ms. (Jane Doe) Klink, Psychologist, and Lisa Duncan, Licensed Psychology Member

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denied Marcus Lee Graham’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), construing it as a motion for reconsideration. The court held that Graham reasserted arguments and evidence previously considered and did not establish an intervening change in law, newly available evidence, clear legal error, or manifest injustice.

Holdings

1. A motion labeled under Rule 59(e) is properly construed as a motion for reconsideration when the relief sought challenges prior decisions rather than merely seeking to alter or amend the judgment.
2. Reconsideration is unavailable where the movant merely reasserts arguments and evidence previously presented and does not establish an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Graham's Rule 59(e) motion should be construed as a motion for reconsideration.
2. Whether Graham established an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, clear legal or factual error, or manifest injustice warranting reconsideration.
3. Whether the judgment, denial of injunctive relief, and denial of leave to amend should be set aside.

Disposition

dismissed