Also known as: FRCP 59 · Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 · Rule 59
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A federal procedural rule authorizing a district court to grant a new trial after a jury or nonjury trial for any reason that would support such relief at common law and to alter or amend a judgment on motion.
Floyd Franklin obtained a jury verdict and judgment against Ferrum Metals on May 1. Ferrum Metals faxed a motion for new trial on May 30, but the clerk filed it on June 1 after the weekend. The court denied the motion because it fell outside the twenty-eight-day window.
Faith Fitzgerald lost a bench trial to Foster Forge on a contract claim. Within twenty-eight days she moved under the rule both to amend the court's sparse findings on causation and for a new trial on damages. The court considered the combined motion and issued supplemental findings.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Fabian Flynn won a jury verdict against Franklin Foundry for product defects. Franklin Foundry timely moved for a new trial claiming evidentiary errors and excessive damages. The court denied the motion after finding the verdict supported by independent documentary evidence.
Freya Freeman recovered $450,000 from Fairfield Bank after a jury trial. The bank moved for a new trial arguing the award was excessive under state standards. The district court denied the motion, preserving the verdict.
Flora Ford obtained judgment against Foster Forge. The defendant later sought to reopen the case through a new trial motion filed after the deadline. The court rejected the request to protect the finality of the judgment.
Fiona Foster prevailed in a bench trial against Ferrum Metals. The losing party moved for a new trial claiming the findings were insufficient. The court entertained the motion and supplemented its findings on causation.
A motion for a new trial must be filed no later than twenty-eight days after entry of judgment. The deadline is strict and cannot be extended by the court on a party's request.
Yes. After a nonjury trial the court may amend its findings or make additional findings and amend the judgment accordingly on a timely motion.
A timely motion for new trial or to alter or amend the judgment has the same effect under appellate timing rules as other specified post-judgment motions.
The rule permits a new trial for any reason for which new trials have been granted at common law in federal court, including verdicts against the weight of the evidence, prejudicial evidentiary errors, and misconduct that affects substantial rights.
…employed a “shock the conscience” test in reviewing jury awards for excessiveness. Federal courts did so pursuant to Federal Rule 59(a) which, as worded at the time of Gasperini , instructed that a trial court could grant a new trial “for any of the reasons for which new trials have heretofore been granted in actions at…