Van Derheydt v. County of Placer

Good Law
32 F. App'x 221
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 12, 2002No. 00-16768; D.C. No. CV-S-00-677 GEB GGHCalifornia1,195 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Erik Van Derheydt, a minor acting through his guardian ad litem, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . 1 We review the district court’s denial of Van Derheydt’s motion for reconsideration for an abuse of discretion, Kona Enters., Inc. v. Estate of Bishop, 229 F.3d 877 , 883 (9th Cir.2000), and we reverse.

We have previously identified four grounds for providing relief under Rule 59(e): (1) to correct manifest errors of law or fact upon which the judgment is based, (2) to present newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence, (3) to apply an intervening change in the law, and (4) to prevent manifest injustice. McDowell v. Calderon, 197 F.3d 1253 , 1255 n. 1 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam and en banc) (citing 11 Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice and Procedure § 2810.1 (2d ed.1995)). We hold that relief is warranted in this case on both the first and the fourth grounds, and that the district court should have granted Van Derheydt’s motion for reconsideration to correct the clear error of law underlying the judgment, and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.