Legal Opinion

Hilborn v. Metropolitan Group Property & Casualty Insurance

District Court, D. Idaho

Decided April 16, 2015No. Case No. 2:12-cv-00636-BLWPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief Judge.

INTRODUCTION

The Court has before it Plaintiffs’ Rule 59(e) Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment or, in the Alternative, Motion for New Trial (Dkt. 173). For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant the motion for a new trial.

ANALYSIS

Plaintiff Robert Hilborn1 asks the Court to alter or amend the verdict against him by entering judgment in his favor or by ordering a new trial. Both requests are brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. Although Robert references only 59(e) in the title of his motion, he references…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. 389 Orange Street Partners v. ArnoldCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  2. Molski v. M.J. Cable, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  3. Charles E. McDowell Jr. v. Arthur Calderon, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  4. Joseph Wood, III v. Charles RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  5. Howard Turner Mary Turner Bill Oskowski Marisa Oskowski v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Company, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fred Jerry Cruz v. Frankie J. Cruz, Roland Cruz, Paul A. Cruz, Agnes C. Ragland, Danny J. Cruz, Edward A. Cruz, Wayne W. Cruz, and Arlene M. CruzDistrict Court, D. Guam · 2026
  2. Gargano v. Plus One Holdings, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2024

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API