Card v. Chin

Background

This was a closed case initially filed by Christopher Lee Card. Card filed a motion asking the court to reconsider its earlier decision dismissing claims against Ra and Valentine and Alameda County Psychologists Drs. Watt and Griffith.

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 through due diligence; fraud by the opposing party; a void judgment; satisfaction of the judgment; or another reason that justifies relief. The court stated that the last category requires extraordinary circumstances. Mere dissatisfaction with the court’s decision or the belief that the court was wrong is not enough.

Court’s reasoning

The court found that Card did not show mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. He did not present newly discovered evidence, fraud, grounds showing that the judgment was void, grounds showing that the judgment had been satisfied, or another reason justifying relief. Instead, he argued that the court’s decision was incorrect. The court explained that such arguments may be raised on appeal but do not provide a basis for reconsideration under Rule 60(b).

Disposition

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin denied Card’s motion for reconsideration. The opinion does not describe the grounds for the earlier dismissal beyond identifying the defendants whose dismissal Card challenged.