Motion for Reconsideration in U.S. Federal Court: Rules, Deadlines, Grounds, and Drafting Guide
A court order does not always have to be the end of the road. In certain circumstances, a party may ask a federal district court to reconsider, alter, amend, or provide relief from its decision.
But there is an important distinction: a “motion for reconsideration” is not one single federal procedure with one universal rule. Depending on the circumstances, the request may arise under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), Rule 60(b), Rule 52(b), or a district court’s local rules.
For anyone involved in U.S. law, court procedures, litigation, or legal drafting, understanding these differences is essential. A poorly labeled or untimely motion can create serious procedural problems.
What Is a Motion for Reconsideration?
A motion for reconsideration is generally a request asking the court to review its previous ruling because there is a legally recognized reason to change, clarify, or provide relief from that ruling.
In federal civil litigation, the most important post-judgment mechanisms include:
Rule 59(e) — motion to alter or amend a judgment
Rule 60(b) — relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding
Rule 52(b) — amended or additional findings
Local rules — procedures that may govern reconsideration of certain non-final orders
The U.S. Courts explains that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern civil proceedings in U.S. district courts, while district courts and Courts of Appeals may also have local rules that must remain consistent with the national rules.
Therefore, before drafting a motion, a lawyer or self-represented litigant should identify exactly what type of ruling is being challenged and which procedural rule applies.
Rule 59(e): The 28-Day Window
One of the most important provisions is Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e).
Rule 59(e) provides that a motion to alter or amend a judgment must be filed no later than 28 days after entry of the judgment. The same rule contains a 28-day deadline for a motion for a new trial.
This deadline is critical.
A Rule 59(e) motion is designed to give the district court an opportunity to correct or reconsider its own recently entered judgment before the matter proceeds further through the appellate process.
The U.S. Supreme Court explained in Banister v. Davis that Rule 59(e) provides a short 28-day period for seeking relief and is directed toward reconsideration of matters properly encompassed in the challenged judgment. The Court also explained that a timely Rule 59(e) motion affects the finality of the judgment for purposes of appeal.
Why the deadline matters
A party should not assume that a court can simply extend the Rule 59(e) deadline because the party missed it.
Rule 59(e) is therefore different from a general request saying, “Please reconsider the decision.” The motion must be brought through the appropriate procedural vehicle and within the applicable deadline.
Rule 60(b): Relief From a Judgment or Order
Rule 60(b) serves a different function.
Under Rule 60(b), a federal district court may provide relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for specified reasons, including:
Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
Newly discovered evidence that could not reasonably have been discovered in time for a Rule 59(b) motion;
Fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
A void judgment;
Certain circumstances involving satisfaction, release, discharge, reversal, or prospective inequity; or
Any other reason that justifies relief.
The timing is also different. Rule 60(b) requires a motion to be made within a reasonable time, and motions based on grounds (1), (2), or (3) generally cannot be made more than one year after entry of the judgment or order.
That does not mean a party has one year to challenge every federal judgment. The particular subsection, the nature of the requested relief, applicable appellate rules, and controlling case law all matter.
Rule 59(e) vs. Rule 60(b)
A simple way to understand the distinction is:
Rule 59(e) is generally used shortly after judgment when a party asks the district court to alter or amend that judgment.
Rule 60(b) provides specific grounds for obtaining relief from a final judgment or order, including circumstances such as mistake, newly discovered evidence, fraud, or a void judgment.
The choice of rule can have significant consequences for deadlines and appellate rights.
A motion should therefore not simply be titled “Motion for Reconsideration” and left at that. The body of the motion should identify the legal authority supporting the requested relief.
Can a Court Reconsider a Non-Final Order?
Sometimes, but the procedure can depend heavily on the applicable local rule.
Federal district courts may have local rules governing motions for reconsideration of interlocutory or non-final orders. For example, the Eastern District of Michigan's local rule distinguishes final orders and judgments from non-final orders and directs parties seeking reconsideration of final judgments to proceed under Rule 59(e) or Rule 60(b).
This illustrates an important drafting lesson:
Never assume that the federal rules alone tell you every requirement for a reconsideration motion.
Always check the local rules of the particular Federal Court where the case is pending.
What Grounds Can Support Reconsideration?
The precise standard varies depending on the procedural rule and jurisdiction, but a strong federal reconsideration motion generally identifies a concrete legal or factual reason rather than merely repeating arguments already rejected.
Potential grounds may include:
1. Intervening change in controlling law
If controlling precedent has changed after the court's ruling, the moving party may have a basis for asking the court to reconsider the decision, depending on the applicable standard.
2. Newly available evidence
New evidence can sometimes support reconsideration, but the motion should explain why the evidence was not previously available and why it matters.
Rule 60(b)(2), for example, specifically addresses newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial through reasonable diligence.
3. Clear legal error
A motion may argue that the court misunderstood or incorrectly applied controlling law.
However, simply disagreeing with the judge is generally not enough. The motion should identify the specific ruling, identify the controlling authority, and explain precisely why the earlier analysis requires correction.
4. Manifest injustice
In jurisdictions recognizing this ground under the applicable reconsideration standard, a party may argue that leaving the ruling unchanged would produce a serious injustice.
Again, the argument should be tied to specific facts and law rather than general statements about unfairness.
5. Mistake, excusable neglect, fraud, or other Rule 60 grounds
Where appropriate, Rule 60(b) provides expressly defined grounds for relief.
How to Draft a Motion for Reconsideration
A well-structured motion can make the court's task much easier.
A practical structure is:
1. Caption
Use the exact federal court name, case number, parties, and case title.
2. Title
Identify the procedural basis clearly, for example:
“Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e)”
or
“Motion for Relief From Judgment Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)”
3. Introduction
Briefly explain what ruling is being challenged and what relief is requested.
4. Procedural background
Identify the relevant order or judgment, its date, and the procedural history necessary to understand the motion.
5. Legal standard
State the applicable federal rule and controlling authority.
6. Specific grounds for relief
Organize each ground under a separate heading.
For example:
“Argument I — The Court Overlooked Controlling Precedent”
“Argument II — Newly Discovered Evidence Requires Reconsideration”
“Argument III — Relief Is Appropriate Under Rule 60(b)(1)”
7. Application of law to facts
This is usually the heart of the motion. Explain exactly how the governing law applies to the particular record.
8. Requested relief
State precisely what the court should do.
9. Signature and required certifications
Follow the applicable federal and local requirements for signatures, service, formatting, and filing.
A Simple Drafting Example
Suppose a federal district court enters judgment against a plaintiff on June 1.
The plaintiff believes the court overlooked a controlling appellate decision that directly affects the legal issue decided in the judgment.
A possible approach would be to examine whether a timely Rule 59(e) motion is appropriate. Because Rule 59(e) requires filing no later than 28 days after entry of judgment, the lawyer should immediately calculate the deadline under the applicable rules rather than waiting until the appeal period approaches.
The motion should then identify:
the exact portion of the judgment challenged;
the controlling precedent;
where that precedent applies;
why the existing judgment is inconsistent with it; and
the precise amendment requested.
That is substantially stronger than writing, “The Court made a mistake and should reconsider.”
Does a Reconsideration Motion Automatically Stop an Appeal Deadline?
This is one of the most important procedural questions.
Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4), certain timely post-judgment motions affect when the time for filing an appeal begins to run. The rule specifically includes a timely Rule 59 motion and certain Rule 60 motions filed within the time allowed for a Rule 59 motion.
The Supreme Court's decision in Banister v. Davis also explains the relationship between a timely Rule 59(e) motion and the finality of a judgment for appellate purposes.
But litigants should never assume that filing any document labeled “motion for reconsideration” automatically changes the appellate deadline.
The exact rule, filing date, substance of the motion, and applicable appellate rules must be examined.
What Happens If the Court Denies Reconsideration?
If the district court denies the motion, the party may still have appellate rights, depending on the case and applicable deadlines.
Federal appellate procedure is highly deadline-sensitive. A party should therefore calculate the appeal deadline independently and carefully review Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4 and any applicable circuit rules.
A motion for reconsideration should not be treated as a substitute for understanding appellate procedure.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
One of the biggest mistakes is filing a motion simply because the party is unhappy with the result.
Another is failing to identify the correct procedural rule.
Other common problems include:
missing the 28-day Rule 59(e) deadline;
presenting arguments that were already fully considered;
introducing evidence without explaining why it could not previously have been presented;
ignoring the district court's local rules;
failing to distinguish a final judgment from an interlocutory order;
confusing reconsideration with an appeal;
failing to explain the precise relief requested; and
overlooking the effect of a post-judgment motion on appellate deadlines.
Good legal drafting is not about making the motion longer. It is about making the legal error, applicable authority, and requested correction immediately understandable.
Findings of Fact and Reconsideration
Reconsideration can also intersect with findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52 permits a party to request amended or additional findings after a nonjury trial. Rule 59 also expressly contemplates amendment of findings and conclusions following a nonjury trial.
This distinction matters in legal drafting because a lawyer challenging a factual finding may need a different procedural approach from a lawyer challenging a legal conclusion.
In other words, “the judge got the facts wrong” and “the judge applied the wrong law” are not necessarily the same procedural argument.
Conclusion
A motion for reconsideration in U.S. federal court is a specialized procedural tool, not simply a second opportunity to argue the case.
Rule 59(e) provides a narrow 28-day mechanism for seeking alteration or amendment of a judgment, while Rule 60(b) provides specified grounds for relief from a final judgment or order. Local rules may impose additional requirements for reconsideration of non-final orders.
For lawyers, law students, and self-represented litigants, the safest drafting strategy is to begin with the type of ruling, identify the correct rule, calculate the correct deadline, state the specific legal or factual ground, and request precise relief.
Understanding these distinctions is an important part of U.S. law and federal Court Procedures, particularly for anyone working with Federal Courts, the Court of Appeals, Legal Rights, and litigation strategy.
Disclaimer
This article is for general legal information and educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Federal rules, circuit precedent, district court local rules, and deadlines can vary by case. Readers should consult the applicable rules and a qualified attorney regarding a specific matter.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comment should be in the form of message and helpful to the viewers