The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Chapter 59
APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS

View Entire Chapter

CHAPTER 59

APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS

59.04 Appeal from order granting new trial.

59.041 Harmless error; effect.

59.06 Matters reviewable on appeal.

59.081 Time for invoking appellate jurisdiction of any court.

59.13 Supersedeas on petition for certiorari.

59.15 Proceedings in pais; authentication.

59.29 Amendment of appellate proceedings.

59.33 Quashing appeals; power of appellate court.

59.35 Judgment; power of appellate court to direct a new trial upon one or more issues.

59.45 Misconception of remedy; Supreme Court.

59.46 Attorney’s fees.

59.04 Appeal from order granting new trial.—Upon the entry of an order granting a new trial, the party aggrieved may prosecute an appeal to the proper appellate court without waiting for final judgment. If the judgment is reversed, the appellate court may direct that final judgment be entered in the trial court for the party obtaining the verdict unless a motion in arrest of judgment or for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict be made and prevail.

History.—RS 1267; GS 1695; RGS 2905; CGL 4615; s. 4, ch. 22854, 1945; s. 1, ch. 71-316.

59.041 Harmless error; effect.—No judgment shall be set aside or reversed, or new trial granted by any court of the state in any cause, civil or criminal, on the ground of misdirection of the jury or the improper admission or rejection of evidence or for error as to any matter of pleading or procedure, unless in the opinion of the court to which application is made, after an examination of the entire case it shall appear that the error complained of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice. This section shall be liberally construed.

History.—s. 1, ch. 6223, 1911; RGS 2812; CGL 4499; s. 14, ch. 67-254.

Note.—Former s. 54.23.

59.06 Matters reviewable on appeal.—

(1) WHAT MAY BE ASSIGNED AS ERROR.—All judgments and orders made in any action wherein the trial court:

(a) May allow or refuse to allow any motion:

1. For a new trial or rehearing,

2. For leave to amend pleadings,

3. For leave to file new or additional pleadings,

4. To amend the record, or

5. For continuance of the action; or

(b) Shall sustain or overrule any motion to dismiss the action

may be assigned as error upon any appeal from the final judgment or order in the action. The appellate court shall hear and determine the matter so assigned under like rules as in other actions.

(2) EFFECT OF PLEADING OVER OR AMENDING.—Pleading over or amending pleadings after order upon motion to dismiss shall not waive the right to have the judgment or order reviewed.

History.—s. 1, ch. 521, 1853; s. 1, ch. 3430, 1883; RS 1265; GS 1693; RGS 2903; CGL 4608; s. 6, ch. 22854, 1945; s. 2, ch. 71-316.

59.081 Time for invoking appellate jurisdiction of any court.—

(1) The time within which and the method by which the jurisdiction of any court in this state possessed of power to review the action of any other court, commission, officer or bureau may be invoked by appeal, certiorari, petition for review or other process by whatever name designated, and the manner of computing such time shall be prescribed by rule of the Supreme Court.

(2) Failure to invoke the jurisdiction of any such court within the time prescribed by such rules shall divest such court of jurisdiction to review such cause.

History.—ss. 1, 2, 3, ch. 67-175; ss. 29, 30, ch. 69-52; s. 16, ch. 71-355.

59.13 Supersedeas on petition for certiorari.—When it appears to the trial court that a petition for certiorari has been or is about to be applied for in an appellate court, the trial court may grant a supersedeas upon petitioner giving a good and sufficient bond, conditioned that the petition shall be duly presented to the appellate court within the time prescribed by the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure and to pay all costs, damages, and expenses occasioned by reason of the stay of proceedings with such other and further conditions as may be fixed by the trial court in the event the order or judgment for which a review is sought is not quashed, modified or reversed.

History.—ss. 1, 7, Feb. 10, 1832; Feb. 17, 1833; Feb. 12, 1836; ss. 3, 4, ch. 521, 1852; RS 1272, 1458; s. 1, ch. 4917, 1901; GS 1701, 1909; RGS 2911, 3170; CGL 4621, 4962; s. 13, ch. 22854, 1945; ss. 3, 5, ch. 71-316.

Note.—Consolidation with former ss. 67.04 and 67.05.

59.15 Proceedings in pais; authentication.—Proceedings in pais, not stenographically reported, may be authenticated by recitals in orders, judgments, or decrees, of the trial court, or of the judge thereof, or by a stipulation by the interested parties.

History.—s. 68, Nov. 23, 1828; s. 1, ch. 138, 1848; RS 1268; GS 1696; s. 10, ch. 7838, 1919; RGS 2906; CGL 4616; s. 15, ch. 22854, 1945; s. 5, ch. 71-316.

59.29 Amendment of appellate proceedings.—The appellate court may, at any time, in the furtherance of justice, upon such terms as may be just, permit appellate proceedings to be amended.

History.—s. 2, ch. 11890, 1927; CGL 4636; s. 29, ch. 22854, 1945.

59.33 Quashing appeals; power of appellate court.—Appellate courts shall have power to quash appeals in all cases in which appeals do not lie, or where they are taken against good faith or merely for delay, and may decree in such case damages against the appellant not exceeding 10 percent.

History.—s. 13, Feb. 10, 1832; s. 50, ch. 1096, 1861; RS 1279; GS 1709; s. 13, ch. 5898, 1909; RGS 2920; CGL 4639; s. 33, ch. 22854, 1945.

59.35 Judgment; power of appellate court to direct a new trial upon one or more issues.—An appellate court may, in reversing a judgment of a lower court brought before it for review by appeal, by the order of reversal, if the error for which reversal is sought is such as to require a new trial, direct that a new trial be had on all the issues shown by the record or upon a part of such issues only. When a reversal is had, with direction for new trial on a part of the issues, all other issues shall be deemed settled conclusively in favor of the appellee.

History.—s. 1, ch. 6467, 1913; RGS 2921; CGL 4640; s. 35, ch. 22854, 1945.

59.45 Misconception of remedy; Supreme Court.—If an appeal be improvidently taken where the remedy might have been more properly sought by certiorari, this alone shall not be a ground for dismissal; but the notice of appeal and the record thereon shall be regarded and acted on as a petition for certiorari duly presented to the Supreme Court.

History.—s. 1, ch. 23826, 1947.

59.46 Attorney’s fees.—In the absence of an expressed contrary intent, any provision of a statute or of a contract entered into after October 1, 1977, providing for the payment of attorney’s fees to the prevailing party shall be construed to include the payment of attorney’s fees to the prevailing party on appeal.

History.—s. 1, ch. 73-84; s. 1, ch. 77-76; s. 1, ch. 83-214.

F.S. 59 on Google Scholar

F.S. 59 on Casetext

Amendments to 59

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 59

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

S372.59 - CONSERVATION-LICENSE-STAMP - RENUMBERED. SEE REC # 6753 - M: S

S372.59 - CONSERVATION-LICENSE-STAMP - RENUMBERED. SEE REC # 6754 - M: F

S817.59 - FRAUD-FALSE STATEMENT - INFORMATION REGARDING FINANCIAL CONDITION - M: F

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

J. TRUMP, v. MAZARS USA, LLP, J. v. AG,, 140 S. Ct. 2019 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Id. , at 658-659, and n. 59. . . .

MCGIRT, v. OKLAHOMA, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (U.S. 2020)

. . . De Graffenried , 238 U.S. 284, 293-294, 35 S.Ct. 764, 59 L.Ed. 1310 (1915). . . . De Graffenried , 238 U.S. 284, 297, 35 S.Ct. 764, 59 L.Ed. 1310 (1915). . . . Miller , 235 U.S. 422, 423, 35 S.Ct. 119, 59 L.Ed. 295 (1914) (lands "within what until recently was . . . De Graffenried , 238 U.S. 284, 289-290, 35 S.Ct. 764, 59 L.Ed. 1310 (1915) ; Washington v. . . . Miller , 235 U.S. 422, 423-425, 35 S.Ct. 119, 59 L.Ed. 295 (1914). . . .

OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE SCHOOL, v. MORRISSEY- BERRU St. v., 140 S. Ct. 2049 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Id. , at 94a, 95a; App. 59. . . .

B. CHIAFALO, v. WASHINGTON, 140 S. Ct. 2316 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Whittington, Originalism, Constitutional Construction, and the Problem of Faithless Electors, 59 Ariz . . .

ESPINOZA, v. MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 140 S. Ct. 2246 (U.S. 2020)

. . . For the school year beginning in fall 2017, Big Sky received 59 applications and ultimately awarded 44 . . . McConnell, Religious Freedom at a Crossroads, 59 U. Chi. L. Rev. 115, 122 (1992). . . .

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, v. BOOKING. COM B. V., 140 S. Ct. 2298 (U.S. 2020)

. . . National Biscuit Co. , 305 U.S. 111, 118-119, 59 S.Ct. 109, 83 L.Ed. 73 (1938), or because it has invested . . . See Kellogg , 305 U.S. at 118-119, 59 S.Ct. 109 ; Abercrombie , 537 F.2d at 9. . . .

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, v. ALLIANCE FOR OPEN SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL, INC., 140 S. Ct. 2082 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Tr. of Oral Arg. 58-59; see, e.g. , Boumediene v. . . .

JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C. v. RUSSO, v. LLC., 140 S. Ct. 2103 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Ryan, Negligent Credentialing: A Cause of Action for Hospital Peer Review Decisions, 59 How. L. . . . Maryland , 235 U.S. 610, 621, 35 S.Ct. 140, 59 L.Ed. 385 (1915) ; Massachusetts v. . . . Socialist Workers Party , 440 U.S. 173, 183, 99 S.Ct. 983, 59 L.Ed.2d 230 (1979). . . . Stat., ch. 164, §§ 10, 11, ch. 169, §§ 58, 59 (1858). . . . United States , 532 U.S. 59, 65-66, 121 S.Ct. 1276, 149 L.Ed.2d 197 (2001). . . .

BOSTOCK, v. CLAYTON COUNTY, GEORGIA v. Jr. Co- R. G. G. R. v., 140 S. Ct. 1731 (U.S. 2020)

. . . White , 548 U.S. 53, 59, 126 S.Ct. 2405, 165 L.Ed.2d 345 (2006). . . . Burlington N. & S.F.R. , 548 U.S. at 59, 126 S.Ct. 2405. . . .

L. BAXTER v. BRACEY,, 140 S. Ct. 1862 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Anderson , 238 U.S. 368, 378-379, 35 S.Ct. 932, 59 L.Ed. 1349 (1915) (imposing liability); id., at 371 . . .

ANDRUS v. TEXAS, 140 S. Ct. 1875 (U.S. 2020)

. . . photo array, 46 Tr. 66, 69-70, and testified at trial that the robber was in the courtroom, id. , at 59 . . .

J. THOLE, v. U. S. BANK N. A, 140 S. Ct. 1615 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Drury , 235 U.S. 106, 120, 35 S.Ct. 77, 59 L.Ed. 151 (1914) (under "the principles governing the duty . . . TVA , 306 U.S. 118, 137-138, 59 S.Ct. 366, 83 L.Ed. 543 (1939). In Heckler v. Mathews , 465 U. . . .

GE ENERGY POWER CONVERSION FRANCE SAS, CORP. SAS, v. OUTOKUMPU STAINLESS USA, LLC,, 140 S. Ct. 1637 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Elg , 307 U.S. 325, 328, 337-349, 59 S.Ct. 884, 83 L.Ed. 1320 (1939) ). . . .

FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, v. AURELIUS INVESTMENT, LLC, LLC, III v. LLC, v. LLC, n De De La El Y v., 140 S. Ct. 1649 (U.S. 2020)

. . . election); Act of Apr. 7, 1798, § 3, 1 Stat. 550 (Mississippi, same); Act of May 7, 1800, § 2, 2 Stat. 59 . . . Charter of the United Nations, 59 Stat. 1048, Art. 73, June 26, 1945, T. S. No. 993 (U. N. . . . The First and Second United States Empires: Governors and Territorial Government 1784-1912, pp. 54, 59 . . . Territory); Act of Apr. 7, 1798, § 3, 1 Stat. 550 (Mississippi); Act of May 7, 1800, §§ 2, 4, 2 Stat. 59 . . . Stat. 514-515 (Illinois); Act of June 4, 1812, § 2, 2 Stat. 744 (Missouri); Act of Feb. 8, 1861, ch. 59 . . .

BANISTER, v. DAVIS,, 140 S. Ct. 1698 (U.S. 2020)

. . . First, Rule 59(e) applies in federal civil litigation generally. . . . Proc. 6(b)(2) (prohibiting extensions to Rule 59(e)'s deadline). . . . really a Rule 59(e) motion at all. . . . Rule 59(e) motions can do the same. . . . Rule 59(e) motions. See, e.g., Skagerberg v. . . .

KELLY, v. UNITED STATES, 140 S. Ct. 1565 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Tr. of Oral Arg. 58-59. . . .

MAINE COMMUNITY HEALTH OPTIONS, v. UNITED STATES v. v. v., 140 S. Ct. 1308 (U.S. 2020)

. . . CBO, The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2014 to 2024, p. 59 (2014). . . .

GEORGIA, v. PUBLIC. RESOURCE. ORG, INC., 140 S. Ct. 1498 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Hall , 440 U.S. 410, 433-439, 99 S.Ct. 1182, 59 L.Ed.2d 416 (1979) (Rehnquist, J., dissenting)); Lawrence . . .

NEW YORK STATE RIFLE PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC. v. CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK,, 140 S. Ct. 1525 (U.S. 2020)

. . . concomitant of this right is the right to take a gun outside the home for certain purposes. 883 F.3d at 58-59 . . . See Brief for Professors of Second Amendment Law et al. as Amici Curiae 10-12; see also App. 51, 56, 59 . . .

ROMAG FASTENERS, INC. v. FOSSIL, INC., 140 S. Ct. 1492 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Minnesota Moline Plow Co. , 235 U.S. 641, 644, 650-651, 35 S.Ct. 221, 59 L.Ed. 398 (1915). . . .

RAMOS, v. LOUISIANA, 140 S. Ct. 1390 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Hall , 440 U.S. 410, 99 S.Ct. 1182, 59 L.Ed.2d 416 (1979), or both, ibid . . . .

BABB, v. WILKIE,, 140 S. Ct. 1168 (U.S. 2020)

. . . American Heritage Dictionary 59 (def. 2) (1969). . . .

KANSAS, v. GLOVER, 140 S. Ct. 1183 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Prouse , 440 U.S. 648, 659, 99 S.Ct. 1391, 59 L.Ed.2d 660 (1979). . . . Prouse , 440 U.S. 648, 658, 99 S.Ct. 1391, 59 L.Ed.2d 660 (1979). . . .

L. ALLEN, v. A. COOPER, III,, 140 S. Ct. 994 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Seminole Tribe , 517 U.S. at 59, 116 S.Ct. 1114. . . .

E. RODRIGUEZ, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION,, 140 S. Ct. 713 (U.S. 2020)

. . . United States , 440 U.S. 48, 54, 99 S.Ct. 914, 59 L.Ed.2d 136 (1979). . . .

ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO v. ACEVEDO FELICIANO,, 140 S. Ct. 696 (U.S. 2020)

. . . App. to Pet. for Cert. 58-59, 152-153 (emphasis deleted). . . .

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, v. NEW YORK,, 140 S. Ct. 599 (U.S. 2020)

. . . But both of those orders were soon stayed by the Ninth Circuit which, in a 59-page opinion, determined . . .

RITZEN GROUP, INC. v. JACKSON MASONRY, LLC, 140 S. Ct. 582 (U.S. 2020)

. . . United States , 440 U.S. 48, 54-55, 99 S.Ct. 914, 59 L.Ed.2d 136 (1979). . . .

LOOP AI LABS, INC. v. GATTI,, 140 S. Ct. 224 (U.S. 2019)

. . . No. 19-59 Supreme Court of the United States. . . .

ELHADY, v. H. KABLE,, 391 F. Supp. 3d 562 (E.D. Va. 2019)

. . . . ¶¶ 54, 59-63; the State Department, which uses the TSDB to screen individuals for visa waiver, visa . . . Co. , 80 F.3d 954, 958-59 (4th Cir. 1996). . . .

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. AQUESTIVE THERAPEUTICS, INC. RX, LLC,, 935 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Jordan , 440 U.S. 332, 347 n.18, 99 S.Ct. 1139, 59 L.Ed.2d 358 (1979) ("[W]e remanded the matter ..., . . .

ALLERGAN SALES, LLC, v. SANDOZ, INC., 935 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Id . col. 3 l. 59-col. 4 l. 6; see id . col. 4 ll. 7-24 (providing a Table of ingredients for the Example . . .

RIDGELL, v. CITY OF PINE BLUFF, A In, 935 F.3d 633 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . P. 50(b), 59(e). . . .

ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 935 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . . §§ 2131 - 59. . . .

SCHINK, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 935 F.3d 1245 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . Bernard assigned Schink a GAF score of 59 and indicated that his prognosis was chronic. . . . Bernard, who assessed Schink for his ability to work, determined a GAF score of 59. . . .

F. SHARPE, v. UNITED STATES,, 935 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . J.A. 858-59. The Bourne memorandum thus recommended that Mr. . . . J.A. 858-59. Moreover, Mr. . . .

REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ST. LOUIS REGION, INC. P. D. O. M. S. C. I. F. A. C. O. G, v. L. PARSON,, 389 F. Supp. 3d 631 (W.D. Mo. 2019)

. . . . § 59. . . .

L. SMITH, v. SHARP,, 935 F.3d 1064 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . to Smith in January 2003, and obtained a Verbal IQ interval of 51-61, a Performance IQ interval of 59 . . .

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, a Oy,, 935 F.3d 752 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Los Angeles , 559 F.3d 1046, 1057-59 (9th Cir. 2009) (irreparable harm likely where order subjected . . .

EDMO, v. CORIZON, INC. Al v. Al, 935 F.3d 757 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Smith , 653 F.3d 550, 552-53, 558-59 (7th Cir. 2011) (law banning hormone treatment and GCS, even if . . .

RAY, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, v. As, 935 F.3d 703 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency , 440 U.S. 391, 401, 99 S.Ct. 1171, 59 L.Ed.2d 401 (1979) ("[T]he Court has . . . Ct. 1171, 59 L.Ed.2d 401 (1979), for determining arm-of-the-state status, we may now substitute a single . . .

SELECT SPECIALTY HOSPITAL- DENVER, INC. v. M. AZAR II, U. S., 391 F. Supp. 3d 53 (D.D.C. 2019)

. . . at 23, 27 n.17, whereas the PRRB found that the LTCHs could have enrolled in Arkansas, see S2-AR at 59 . . .

R. PESCI, v. BUDZ, LLC, LLC,, 935 F.3d 1159 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . Obama , 760 F.3d 54, 59 (D.C. Cir. 2014). . . .

ARTHREX, INC. v. SMITH NEPHEW, INC., 935 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at col. 7 l. 58-col. 8 l. 59 (as amended by Certificate of Correction) (emphases added to disputed . . .

IN RE J. BARIBEAU,, 603 B.R. 797 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 2019)

. . . P. 59 (" Rule 59"), which is made applicable to bankruptcy cases under FED. R. BANKR. P. 9023. . . . P. 59(E). "A Rule 59(e) motion is a motion that calls into question the correctness of a judgment." . . . In re Transtexas Gas Corp. , 303 F.3d 571, 581 (5th Cir. 2002). " Rule 59(e) is properly invoked 'to . . . A Rule 59 motion "is not the proper vehicle for rehashing evidence, legal theories, or arguments that . . . (Hearing on Motion to Convert, Audio 4:03:59-4:04:08, June 24, 2019). . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. HOPPER,, 934 F.3d 740 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 59. Id. Id. at 61. Id. at 64. Id. at 89. Id. at 90. R.122 (Trial Tr. Day 2) at 54. . . . Id. at 59. In United States v. . . . R.118 at 59. Id. at 61 (internal quotation marks omitted). Id. at 64. R.123 at 26. R.118 at 90. . . .

SCRIMO, v. LEE,, 935 F.3d 103 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Mantello, 333 F.3d 51, 59 (2d Cir. 2003) (confirming that "[t]his test applies post-AEDPA"). . . .

SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR v. BRISTOL EXCAVATING, INC., 935 F.3d 122 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . .%20.mp3 ("Oral Arg.") at 24:38-24:59 (argued Sept. 11, 2018) ( [Counsel for Department of Labor]: "[ . . .

WOLFINGTON, v. RECONSTRUCTIVE ORTHOPAEDIC ASSOCIATES II PC, a k a, 935 F.3d 187 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . Wolfington moved for reconsideration under Rule 59(e), which the District Court denied. . . . been entered, it must also move to set aside the judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59 . . . "Where a timely motion to amend judgment is filed under Rule 59(e), the Rule 15 and 59 inquiries turn . . . JA 59-64. . . .

COLE v. CARSON, v., 935 F.3d 444 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . to the officer's perception of danger to himself and thus to qualified immunity. 572 U.S. 650, 657-59 . . . Jones Dissent at 458-59, 436-69. . . .

BACA v. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF STATE, G. T. L. M., 935 F.3d 887 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . Coleman , 307 U.S. at 438, 59 S.Ct. 972 ; see also Kerr v. . . . Id. at 438, 59 S.Ct. 972. . . . Id. at 438, 59 S.Ct. 972 (emphasis added). . . . Id. at 59-60, 117 S.Ct. 1055. . . . Dep't's Br. at 59. . . .

PARKER, v. LANDRY,, 935 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . Chapman, 452 U.S. 337, 347, 101 S.Ct. 2392, 69 L.Ed.2d 59 (1981) ), and we do not hesitate to condemn . . .

BURKE, v. REGALADO, v., 935 F.3d 960 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . In that motion, the Sheriffs sought a new trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) or, in the . . . After trial, the Sheriffs filed a joint motion under Rule 59(a) asking the court to order a new trial . . . Standard of review We review the denial of a Rule 59(a) motion for abuse of discretion. . . . On the denial of the Sheriffs' post-trial motion for setoff, we review rulings on Rule 59(e) motions . . . Br. at 59. . . .

UNITED STATES v. BEGAY,, 934 F.3d 1033 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . woman by beating her with his fists and by repeatedly kicking a stick into her vagina. 510 F.2d at 458-59 . . . Nu-Enamel Corp. , 305 U.S. 315, 333, 59 S.Ct. 191, 83 L.Ed. 195 (1938). . . .

UNITED STATES v. SHAYOTA, v., 934 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . State , 10 Tenn. 58, 59-60 (Err. & App. 1821) (holding that "depositions ... may be read on trial against . . .

UNITED STATES v. CUEVAS- LOPEZ,, 934 F.3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Moreno-Cisneros , 319 F.3d 456, 458-59 (9th Cir. 2003) (noting that "Guideline § 4A1.2 is analogous to . . .

CONILLE v. COUNCIL AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, 935 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . P. 59(e), requesting that the court enter judgment for Council 93 as to its counterclaim. . . . On December 20, 2017, Local 402 filed a timely motion to amend the judgment under " Rules 59(e) and 60 . . . The motion may accompany a motion for a new trial under Rule 59." Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(b). We agree. . . . Though Local 402 titled its motion as one under Rule 59(e) and Rule 60(b)(6), not Rule 52(b), nomenclature . . . Unit 57, 901 F.3d 52, 59 (1st Cir. 2018) (noting that, following a bench trial, this court reviews findings . . .

TURCO v. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, NEW JERSEY,, 935 F.3d 155 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . JA 55, 58-59. JA 60, 64. JA 75. JA 64. JA 86. JA 87. JA 88-89. JA 205. JA 145. JA 145. JA 145. . . .

UNITED STATES v. CANO,, 934 F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 958-59. . . .

ANZA TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. MUSHKIN, INC., 934 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at col. 2, ll. 53-59. . . .

SENNE v. KANSAS CITY ROYALS BASEBALL CORP. LLC LLC LP St. LLC LLC LLC LLC L. P. L. P. LLC LLC L. P. AZPB L. P. P LLC LLC LP LLP LLC LLC,, 934 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . See id. at 1057-59 (Thomas, J., dissenting). . . .

AMAZON. COM, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 934 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . final regulations (the ones applicable here), which reflected a minor reworking of the definition. 59 . . . rule merely "clarified" when an item would be deemed similar to the 28 items listed in the definition. 59 . . . not commercially transferrable, then it could not have been transferred in a controlled transaction." 59 . . . Rep. 97-494, at 158-59 (1982), as reprinted in 1982 U.S.C.C.A.N. 781, 921-22. . . .

PASSARO, Jr. v. VIRGINIA, 935 F.3d 243 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Sys. , No. 1:09-cv-59, 2010 WL 420048, at *5-6 (W.D. Va. Feb. 1, 2010) ; Martin-Bangura , 640 F. . . .

STATES v. RYAN,, 935 F.3d 40 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . App'x 858, 858-59 (11th Cir. 2016) ; United States v. Bullard, 301 F. . . .

UNITED STATES v. BROWN,, 935 F.3d 43 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Sharpsteen , 913 F.2d 59, 63-64 (2d Cir. 1990) (uncertainty whether sentencing judge "recognized" authority . . .

NEW YORK STATE CITIZENS COALITION FOR CHILDREN, v. J. POOLE,, 935 F.3d 56 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Dep't of Health & Human Servs. , 798 F.2d 57, 59 (2d Cir. 1986). . . .

NALPROPION PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ACTAVIS LABORATORIES FL, INC., 934 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . O'Malley col. 1 l. 59- 62. . . . of naltrexone administered with bupropion as a "withdrawal attenuating agent," O'Malley col. 2 ll. 59 . . .

MENAKER, v. HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY,, 935 F.3d 20 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 59. Id. at 57. Id. (emphasis added). . . .

HAWKINS v. I- TV DIGITALIS TAVKOZLESI ZRT. f k a DMCC Rt. DIGI RCS RDS S. A. RCS S. A. DIGI N. V. v. i- TV f k a DMCC Rt. DIGI RCS RDS S. A. RCS S. A. DIGI N. V., 935 F.3d 211 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . Brief of Appellees/Cross-Appellants at 59 n.12. . . .

BAUGHMAN, v. HICKMAN K. M., 935 F.3d 302 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Cuellar , 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). These claims were properly dismissed. II. . . .

UNITED STATES v. PAWLAK,, 935 F.3d 337 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Sandlin , 589 F.3d at 758-59 (citation omitted). . . .

PIZZUTO, Jr. v. BLADES,, 933 F.3d 1166 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 59. . . .

MAMMANA, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, 934 F.3d 368 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . Chapman , 452 U.S. 337, 346, 101 S.Ct. 2392, 69 L.Ed.2d 59 (1981) ). . . .

YOUKHANNA v. CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS C., 934 F.3d 508 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . R. 69-14 (Taylor Dep. at 53, 59) (Page ID #2586, 2592). . . . R. 69-14 (Taylor Dep. at 59) (Page ID #2592). Matal v. . . . R. 67-14 (Youkhanna Dep. at 59-60) (Page ID #1796) (explaining he was prevented from describing the history . . .

IN RE J. SHENK, Sr. J. Sr. v. U. S., 603 B.R. 671 (Bankr. N.D. N.Y. 2019)

. . . Debtor's Student Loan Debt Debtor is currently 59 years old. . . .

IN RE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE S SUNDAY TICKET ANTITRUST LITIGATION, Jr. v. LLC LLC NFL LLC LLC LP LLC LLC NFL LP LLC LP LLC LP Co. LLC LP LLC, 933 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Op. at 1156-59. . . .

J. MALOUF, v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,, 933 F.3d 1248 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . NLRB , 305 U.S. 197, 229, 59 S.Ct. 206, 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938) ). Discussion I. Mr. . . .

KOH, v. USTICH,, 933 F.3d 836 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id . at 59. Id . at 103. Id ., Interview Video 2 at 45:20-32. Interview Tr. at 117-18. . . .

EFFEX CAPITAL, LLC, v. NATIONAL FUTURES ASSOCIATION,, 933 F.3d 882 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . NYSE , 99 F.3d 49, 59 (2d Cir. 1996) ("Furthermore, allowing suits against the Exchange arising out of . . .

MCMICHAEL, v. TRANSOCEAN OFFSHORE DEEPWATER DRILLING, INCORPORATED RIGP DCL, L. L. C. USA,, 934 F.3d 447 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . 2014 and 2018, the defendants, Transocean Offshore Deepwater et al., reduced their offshore fleet by 59% . . . He was 59 years old. . . . Eckert's performance, ranking, and potential scores is 59%. . . . While he was younger than McMichael at 49 years old, he scored well above McMichael's 71% (or 59%) with . . .

M. RODEN, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,, 389 F. Supp. 3d 548 (S.D. Ohio 2019)

. . . PageID 59. . . .

IN RE ASCOT FUND LIMITED, a, 603 B.R. 271 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2019)

. . . Recognition of Foreign Main Proceeding and Certain Related Relief , dated May 29, 2019, at ¶¶ 22, 23, 59 . . .

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR GUN RIGHTS, INC. v. MANGAN, G. J., 933 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . See. e.g ., McKee , 649 F.3d at 59-60 (upholding a $100 contribution threshold); Yamada , 786 F.3d at . . .

HARDEMAN, v. CURRAN,, 933 F.3d 816 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Chapman , 452 U.S. 337, 347, 101 S.Ct. 2392, 69 L.Ed.2d 59 (1981). . . .

NAUMOVSKI, v. NORRIS, 934 F.3d 200 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Ellerth , 524 U.S. 742, 758-59, 118 S. . . .

MARTINEAU, v. WIER, 934 F.3d 385 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . ), and it appears that the Tenth Circuit has adopted a similar rule, see Eastman , 493 F.3d at 1157-59 . . .

CLARK, v. WARDEN,, 934 F.3d 483 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . (Id. , PageID 1558-59) After this comment, Stewart volunteered for the first time that she saw Clark . . .

MARTIN, v. MARINEZ,, 934 F.3d 594 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Salem , 832 F.3d 953, 958-59 (9th Cir. 2016) ; Black v. . . . Id. at 258-59, 98 S.Ct. 1042. . . . Watt , 235 F.3d 154, 155-59 (3d Cir. 2000) (no damages for costs incurred in criminal prosecution for . . .

ODDO, v. BIMBO BAKERIES U. S. A. INC., 391 F. Supp. 3d 466 (E.D. Pa. 2019)

. . . No. 59.) . . .

JANJUA, v. NEUFELD, USCIS T. USCIS K. U. S. U. S. P. U. S., 933 F.3d 1061 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 440 U.S. 147, 153, 99 S.Ct. 970, 59 L.Ed.2d 210 (1979). . . .

DEAR, v. Q CLUB HOTEL, LLC, v. Q LLC,, 933 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . the district court erred in denying his motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59 . . .

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, v. HOSPIRA, INC. v. Dr. s Dr. s, 933 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. col. 1 ll. 59-61. . . . by pemetrexed, are "particularly active ... inhibitors of thymidylate synth[ase]," Taylor col. 1 ll. 59 . . . Health Servs. of Crawford Cty., Inc. , 467 U.S. 51, 59, 104 S.Ct. 2218, 81 L.Ed.2d 42 (1984) ("Estoppel . . .

FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE COMPANY, v. KAUFMAN,, 934 F.3d 585 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Although an issue presented for the first time in a Rule 59(e) motion generally is not timely raised, . . . The district court considered Kaufman's Rule 59(e) motion raising Section 10-10 of the Illinois LLC Act . . . In denying Kaufman's Rule 59(e) motion, the district clarified that Kaufman was not found liable solely . . . waived this argument; he failed to raise it before the district court either before judgment or in his 59 . . .

REYES, v. FISCHER, J. X., 934 F.3d 97 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Sheriff's Dep't, 788 F.3d 54, 59 (2d Cir. 2015) ). . . .

PILLAR DYNASTY LLC, v. NEW YORK COMPANY, INC., 933 F.3d 202 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . P. 59(e). . . . P. 59(e) and removing the trebled portions of its profits award. . . . Under Rule 59(e), "district courts may alter or amend judgment to correct a clear error of law or prevent . . . A Rule 59(e) motion "may not be used to relitigate old matters, or to raise arguments or present evidence . . . P. 59(e) does not properly serve as an occasion to repeat already-defeated arguments, in deciding such . . .

PARENT PROFESSIONAL ADVOCACY LEAGUE M. W. a F. D. S. S. a S. Y. v. CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS J., 934 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 758-59. What we refer to as "the complaint" is the First Amended Class Action Complaint. . . .

UNITED STATES v. L. HARPER,, 934 F.3d 524 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 57-59, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985). . . . See Hill, 474 U.S. at 57-59, 106 S.Ct. 366. . . .

BOUCHER, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,, 934 F.3d 530 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Corps Manual at 59. . . .

UNITED STATES v. BROWN, v. J., 932 F.3d 1011 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . That's not error under Gall . 552 U.S. at 59, 128 S.Ct. 586. . . .

WINDRIDGE OF NAPERVILLE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, v. PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY,, 932 F.3d 1035 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 59. . . .