Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Alston v. Prairie Farms Dairy, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Mississippi, Greenville Division

October 23, 2018

JASON ALSTON PLAINTIFF
v.
PRAIRIE FARMS DAIRY, INC. d/b/a Luvel DEFENDANT

          ORDER

          DEBRA M. BROWN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Before the Court are numerous post-judgment motions filed by Jason Alston.

         I Relevant Procedural Background

         On April 16, 2018, on cross-motions for summary judgment, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of Prairie Farms Dairy, Inc.[1] and entered a final judgment dismissing this case with prejudice. Docs. #98, #99. Three days earlier, on April 13, 2018, Alston's motion for sanctions alleging spoliation of evidence by Prairie Farms was denied. Doc. #88.

         On April 27, 2018, Alston filed a motion for relief from judgment and a motion for a new trial. Docs. #100, #102. Prairie Farms responded in opposition to both motions on May 11, 2018. Doc. #107. Alston replied on May 14, 2018. Docs. #110, #111, #112.

         Also on May 14, 2018, Alston filed a renewed motion for sanctions alleging spoliation of evidence. Doc. #108. Prairie Farms responded in opposition on May 29, 2018, Doc. #113; and on June 13, 2018, Alston replied, [2] Doc. #123.

         On May 30, 2018, Alston filed three motions: a motion to compel the testimony of Jeremy Odom, Doc. #114; a motion to compel surveillance video footage, Doc. #115; and a motion for an evidentiary hearing, Doc. #116. The next day, Alston filed three more motions: a second motion for an evidentiary hearing, Doc. #118; a second motion to compel surveillance video footage, Doc. #119; and a motion to recuse or disqualify the undersigned district judge and United States Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden, [3] Doc. #120. Prairie Farms responded to all six motions. Docs. #124, #125, #126, #127. Alston replied. Docs. #128, #129, #130, #131.

         On July 10, 2018, Alston filed a “Motion for Judicial Notice of Defendant's and Attorneys' for the Defendant Fraud upon the Court.”[4] Doc. #135. Prairie Farms responded in opposition, Doc. #141; and Alston replied, Doc. #142.

         Finally, on July 20, 2018, Alston filed a “Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.” Doc. #139. Prairie Farms responded in opposition, Doc. #143; and Alston replied, Doc. #145.

         II Analysis

         The Court addresses each of Alston's motions in turn.

         A. Rule 60 Motion

         Alston contends that relief from the Court's judgment is warranted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)-specifically subsections (2), (3) and (6). These subsections provide, in pertinent part:

the court may relieve a party … from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: …
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud …, misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; … or
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(2), (3), (6).

         1. Rule 60(b)(2)

         Arguing that there is newly discovered evidence entitling him to relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(2), Alston attached to his memorandum brief[5] three documents: (1) a public record request and incident report from the Kosciusko Police Department, in which an officer states that he “watched video from the cameras at Luvel and saw [a stolen] truck leave the parking lot” while investigating a stolen car in January 2017, Doc. #101-2 at 2; (2) an April 22, 2018, declaration of Tim Lee, an employee of Prairie Farms, in which Lee states that “[t]he area that … Alston was assigned to does record footage, ” Doc. #101-3 at 1; and (3) an April 21, 2018, declaration of James Stewart which states that Rodney Smith is “openly dishonest and will say anything to get his way” and that Alston helped Stewart, who “was a dock worker on the outside [of] the building, ” Doc. #101-3 at 2.

         In response, Prairie Farms argues that the documents proffered by Alston as newly discovered evidence are irrelevant, immaterial, and, in any event, could have been ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.