(HC) Godfrey v. Warden PVSP

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 10, 20205:20-cv-01381California884 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

DISCUSSION

23 A. Standard of Review 24 Where the court’s ruling has resulted in a final judgment or order (e.g., after 25 dismissal or summary judgment motion), a motion for reconsideration may be based either 26 on Rule 59(e) (motion to alter or amend judgment) or Rule 60(b) (motion for relief from 27 judgment) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Am. Ironworks & Erectors v. N. Am. Constr. Corp., 248 F.3d 892, 898-99 (9th Cir. 2001). The denial of a motion for reconsideration under Rule 59(e) is construed as a denial of relief under Rule 60(b). See McDowell v. Calderon, 197 F.3d 1253, 1255 n.3 (9th Cir. 1999) (citation omitted) (en banc). Motions for reconsideration should not be frequently made or freely granted; they are not a substitute for appeal or a means of attacking some perceived error of the court. See Twentieth Century - Fox Film Corp. v. Dunnahoo, 637 F.2d 1338, 1341 (9th Cir. 1981). “‘[T]he major grounds that justify reconsideration involve an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice.’” Pyramid Lake Paiute…

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.