Cuyler v. Department of the Army, No. 3:2010cv01561 - Document 19 (D.S.C. 2010)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER re 18 Objections filed by James M Cuyler: The court deems Plaintiff's objections to be a motion to alter or amend judgment under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and denies that motion. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 10/19/2010. (cbru, )

Download PDF
Cuyler v. Department of the Army Doc. 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION James M. Cuyler, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Department of the Army, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) Case No. 3:10cv1561-CMC OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s “objections” to this court’s order and judgment entered October 6, 2010. The court deems these objections to be a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Rule 59(e).1 Rule 59 motions to alter or amend a judgment are disfavored. The Fourth Circuit recognizes only three limited grounds for a district court's grant of a motion under Rule 59(e), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: (1) to accommodate an intervening change in controlling law; (2) to account for new evidence not available earlier; or (3) to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice. Hutchinson v. Staton, 994 F.2d 1076, 1081 (4th Cir. 1993). A party’s mere disagreement with the court's ruling does not warrant a Rule 59(e) motion. Id. (citing Atkins v. Marathon LeTorneau Co., 130 F.R.D. 625, 626 (S.D. Miss. 1990)). Plaintiff does not suggest any change in controlling law. Neither does he offer any arguments not previously considered and rejected or otherwise direct the court to any clear error of law or fact which would result in manifest injustice. The court, therefore, finds no basis on which to modify its earlier ruling. 1 The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not allow for “objections” to an order and judgment. Dockets.Justia.com Plaintiff is advised that his right to further review of this court’s decisions is through appeal to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Any further filings in this court shall be resolved by docket text order which may contain a ruling with no further explanation. A copy of any such orders will be mailed to Plaintiff. For the reasons set forth above, the court deems Plaintiff’s objections to be a motion to alter or amend judgment under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and denies that motion. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Cameron McGowan Currie CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Columbia, South Carolina October 19, 2010

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.