Benson v. Family Tree Corporation, Inc.

Background

The court considered the plaintiffs’ letter request for permission to file a motion for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). John Benson and Brian Benson represented themselves. Ann Kemske and Jon Kemske were represented by counsel.

On August 18, 2020, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, dismissed the case with prejudice, and entered judgment. On September 3, the plaintiffs asked for permission under Local Rule 7.1(j) to file a Rule 59(e) motion. The defendants opposed the request, and the plaintiffs replied. Before the court ruled on the letter request, the plaintiffs filed their Rule 59(e) motion on September 15. They filed a notice of appeal from the August 18 judgment on September 16.

Court’s Analysis

Local Rule 7.1(j) generally requires prior court permission and a showing of compelling circumstances before a party files a motion for reconsideration. The court explained, however, that the Eighth Circuit had indicated that this local requirement likely does not apply to post-judgment motions filed within the time allowed by Rule 59(e). Rule 59(e) expressly permits a party to file a motion to alter or amend a judgment.

The court also held that the notice of appeal did not prevent it from ruling on the Rule 59(e) motion. Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4), a notice of appeal filed while a qualifying post-judgment motion is pending remains dormant until the district court resolves that motion.

Order

Judge Michael J. Davis denied as moot the plaintiffs’ letter request to file a motion for reconsideration because they had a right to file the Rule 59(e) motion without permission and had already filed it. The court did not decide the Rule 59(e) motion in this order. It ordered the defendants to file their opposition within 30 days after the order was filed and the plaintiffs to file their reply within 50 days.