Philippeaux v. Entin

Background

On February 10, 2020, Philander Philippeaux moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend the court’s February 5, 2020 order. That earlier order adopted a January 13, 2020 report and recommendation by Magistrate Judge Netburn. Philippeaux argued that the earlier order rested on serious factual and legal errors.

Philippeaux’s Argument

Philippeaux did not claim that there had been a change in controlling law or that new evidence had become available. Instead, he argued that reconsideration was needed to prevent a serious injustice because he is not a United States citizen and therefore believed the court had diversity jurisdiction.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy and that a Rule 59(e) motion is generally not a vehicle for rearguing issues or presenting arguments that could have been made before judgment. The court stated that such a motion may be granted only for an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice.

The court found that Philippeaux had repeatedly asserted that he was a citizen of Florida, the state where he was incarcerated. The presentence investigation report in his underlying criminal case stated that he had immigrated to the United States with his mother in 1987, became a legal permanent resident in 1990, and had lived only in Florida since coming to the United States. The court also noted that the earlier report and recommendation had determined that Philippeaux was a Florida citizen for diversity purposes and that this meant the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the action.

Ruling

Judge Ronnie Abrams found no clear error or manifest injustice in the earlier determination. The court denied Philippeaux’s motion to alter or amend the February 5 order under Rule 59(e). The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at Docket 67 and mail Philippeaux a copy of the order.