Fredin v. Halberg Criminal Defense
- Susan Nelson
- 0:19-cv-03068
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Fredin v. Halberg Criminal Defense, Judge Nelson denied Fredin permission to seek reconsideration because he showed no compelling circumstances.
Brock Fredin was affected by the denial of permission to file a motion for reconsideration; the defendants were Halberg Criminal Defense and Christina Zauhar.
What happened
In Fredin v. Halberg Criminal Defense, Brock Fredin asked for permission to file a motion asking the court to reconsider its earlier order. That earlier order granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and denied Fredin’s request to amend his filing.
The court’s local rule required Fredin to obtain permission before filing a reconsideration motion. He had to show compelling circumstances, such as a clear legal or factual mistake or newly discovered evidence.
Judge Susan Richard Nelson ruled that Fredin had not shown the required compelling circumstances. She denied his letter request for permission to file a reconsideration motion.
The detailed version
- Fredin v. Halberg Criminal Defense · No. 0:19-cv-03068
- Susan Nelson
- May 29, 2020
Background
Brock Fredin, representing himself, submitted a letter request asking for leave—that is, permission—to file a motion for reconsideration. He sought reconsideration of the court’s May 27, 2020 order, which granted Halberg Criminal Defense and Christina Zauhar’s motion to dismiss and denied Fredin’s motion to amend.
Legal standard
Under District of Minnesota Local Rule 7.1(j), a party must first obtain the court’s permission before filing a motion for reconsideration. Permission is available only upon a showing of “compelling circumstances.” The court explained that reconsideration motions have a limited purpose: correcting a clear legal or factual error or addressing newly discovered evidence.
Ruling
The court found that Fredin had not established the compelling circumstances required by the local rule. Judge Susan Richard Nelson therefore denied Fredin’s letter request for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. The opinion did not reconsider the merits of the earlier order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.