Fredin v. Miller
- Susan Nelson
- 0:19-cv-03051
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Fredin v. Miller, Judge Nelson denied Brock Fredin’s request to seek reconsideration and denied his request to recuse the assigned judges.
Brock Fredin and the defendants in the case; Fredin’s request for permission to seek reconsideration was denied, and his request for recusal was also denied.
What happened
Fredin v. Miller involved Brock Fredin’s request to reconsider an earlier order that granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss. Fredin represented himself.
Fredin asked for permission to file a reconsideration motion. The court’s local rule required permission and allowed it only when the party showed compelling circumstances, such as a serious legal or factual error or newly discovered evidence.
The court found that Fredin had not shown compelling circumstances and denied his request for permission to seek reconsideration. Judge Susan Richard Nelson also denied, to the extent requested, Fredin’s request to recuse the judges assigned to the case.
The detailed version
- Fredin v. Miller · No. 0:19-cv-03051
- Susan Nelson
- June 12, 2020
Background
Brock Fredin, representing himself, submitted a letter request asking for permission to file a motion for reconsideration. The request concerned the court’s June 10, 2020 order, which granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss.
Legal standard
District of Minnesota Local Rule 7.1(j) requires a party to obtain permission before filing a motion for reconsideration. Permission is available only upon a showing of “compelling circumstances.” Reconsideration is limited to correcting a clear legal or factual error or considering newly discovered evidence.
Ruling
The court ruled that Fredin had not established the required compelling circumstances. It therefore denied Fredin’s letter request for permission to file a motion for reconsideration. The court also denied, to the extent Fredin requested it, his request that the judges assigned to the case recuse themselves, meaning step aside from the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.