Olson v. Hennepin County
- Susan Nelson
- 0:21-cv-02661
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Olson v. Hennepin County, Judge Nelson denied Olson’s rehearing motions and request to seek reconsideration of the earlier dismissal.
Jeffrey A. Olson’s requests to revisit the earlier dismissal were denied; Hennepin County opposed those requests.
What happened
In Olson v. Hennepin County, the court had previously granted Hennepin County’s motion to dismiss and denied Jeffrey A. Olson’s motion for summary judgment.
Olson filed two motions for rehearing and a letter that the court treated as a request for permission to seek reconsideration. He proposed changing his complaint, entering Form 95 into the record, and adding Minnesota and the United States as defendants. Hennepin County opposed his requests.
The court found that Olson had not shown the compelling circumstances required for reconsideration and that his proposed changes would not fix the problems that led to dismissal. Judge Susan Richard Nelson denied both rehearing motions and denied Olson’s request for permission to seek reconsideration.
The detailed version
- Olson v. Hennepin County · No. 0:21-cv-02661
- Susan Nelson
- July 13, 2022
Background
The court previously granted Hennepin County’s motion to dismiss and denied Jeffrey A. Olson’s motion for summary judgment in a June 14, 2022 order. Olson, representing himself, then filed two motions for rehearing. He also sent a letter that the court construed, meaning treated, as a motion requesting permission to seek reconsideration. Hennepin County opposed the requests.
Olson’s Requests
Olson essentially sought to amend his complaint. He stated that he wanted to have Form 95 entered into the record and to add the State of Minnesota and the United States as defendants.
Court’s Analysis
The court applied District of Minnesota Local Rule 7.1(j), which requires a party to obtain permission before filing a motion for reconsideration. Permission requires a showing of “compelling circumstances.” The court explained that reconsideration is limited to correcting a clear legal or factual error or presenting newly discovered evidence.
The court found that Olson had not established the required compelling circumstances. It also found that his proposed amendments would not cure the defects that led to dismissal of the action.
Order
Judge Susan Richard Nelson ordered that Olson’s two motions for rehearing were DENIED. The court also ordered that Olson’s letter request for permission to seek reconsideration was DENIED.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.