Free Order on Motion to Alter Judgment - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:02-cv-02297-WDM-OES

Document 58

Filed 09/30/2005

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO JUDGE WALKER D. MILLER Civil Action No. 02-cv-2297-WDM-OES RENEE V. KELLER, Plaintiff, v. JOHN E. POTTER, et al., Defendants.

ORDER ON MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT Miller, J. This case is before me on the plaintiff' motion to alter or amend the judgment s issued October 4, 2004. The motion is opposed. For the reasons that follow, I conclude the motion should be denied. A Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend a judgment " should be granted only ` to correct manifest errors of law or to present newly discovered evidence.' "Phelps v. Hamilton, 122 F.3d 1309, 1324 (10th Cir. 1997). Plaintiff alleges I erred in granting summary judgment in defendants' favor because there were genuine issues of disputed fact. She complains that I should have ensured that substantial justice was done instead of " rigidly adher[ing]"to procedural rules.1

In response to the motion for summary judgment, plaintiff failed to admit or deny defendants' stated facts as required by my Pretrial and Trial Procedures, § 6.3.

1

Case 1:02-cv-02297-WDM-OES

Document 58

Filed 09/30/2005

Page 2 of 2

Upon review of the parties' arguments, I conclude that plaintiff has not raised either a manifest error of law or newly discovered evidence. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion to alter or amend the judgment, filed October 14, 2004, is denied. DATED at Denver, Colorado, on September 30, 2005. BY THE COURT:

/s/ Walker D. Miller United States District Judge

PDF FINAL

2