Emerson

(PC) Dillingham v. Emerson

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 1, 20201:18-cv-00507California1,100 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JERRY DILLINGHAM, Case No. 1:18-cv-00507-AWI-SAB (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE v. COURT’S JUNE 12, 2020 ORDER

N. EMERSON, et al., [ECF No. 76]

14 Defendants. 15 Plaintiff Jerry Dillingham is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s objections, filed on July 14, 2020. The Court construes Plaintiff’s objections to the Court’s June 12, 2020 order as a motion for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) governs the reconsideration of final orders of the district court. Rule 60(b) permits a district court to relieve a party from a final order or judgment on grounds of: “(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence . . .; (3) fraud . . . of an adverse…

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.