Card v. Union City Police Department

Background

Christopher Lee Card moved for reconsideration of the court’s May 7, 2024 dismissal of his action. Card also filed an appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit later dismissed the appeal and issued its mandate.

Legal standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) permits relief from a judgment for specified reasons, including mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; newly discovered evidence that could not previously have been found with reasonable diligence; fraud by the opposing party; a void judgment; satisfaction of the judgment; or another reason justifying relief. The court explained that the last category requires extraordinary circumstances. A party’s dissatisfaction with an order or belief that the court made a legal error is not enough. The rule is not a substitute for an appeal.

Court’s reasoning

The court found that Card did not show mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. He identified no newly discovered evidence, fraud, basis for finding the judgment void, or basis for finding that the judgment had been satisfied. He also identified no other reason justifying relief. Instead, Card stated that he believed the court had erred in dismissing his action. The court said that type of argument may be raised on appeal but does not support reconsideration. The court also noted that the Ninth Circuit had already dismissed Card’s appeal.

Disposition

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin denied Card’s motion for reconsideration. The opinion did not reconsider or explain the underlying reasons for the May 7, 2024 dismissal.