Osipchak v. Brevon Developers, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that a reasonable officer would have found a probability that plaintiff would engage in dangerous behavior
• explaining that “it is ‘well established’ that Rule 59(e) relief is not warranted ‘when [a motion] is premised on evidence that the party had in his control prior to the original entry of judgment’” (alteration in original
• discussing the four limited grounds available for a Rule 59(e) motion and the “palpable defect” standard under Local Rule 7.1(h)
• confirming no duty to “search the entire record” in evaluating presence or absence of genuine dispute
• “Though we harbor doubts about the merits of this argument, see generally Pino v. Higgs, 75 F.3d 1461, 1469 (10th Cir.1996) (explaining contours of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments in cases involving mental-health seizures
• relief under R. 59(e) is rare

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).