Opinion
Civil Action No. 3: 03-CV-2450-B.
January 11, 2005
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff VRC L.L.C.'s Motion for New Trial, (doc. 37), filed January 6, 2005, which challenges several of the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. After review of VRC's pleadings and arguments, the Court DENIES VRC's Motion.
Following a one day bench trial on October 4, 2004, the Court dictated detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law on the record on October 21, 2004. The Court then entered written findings of fact and conclusions of law that incorporated its oral findings and conclusions on December 21, 2004.
Pursuant to Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may grant a new trial upon motion of a party. However, "[c]ourts do not grant new trials unless it is reasonably clear that prejudicial error has crept into the record or that substantial justice has not been done, and the burden of showing harmful error rests on the party seeking the new trial." Sibley v. Lemaire, 184 F.3d 481, 487 (5th Cir. 1999). Here, VRC argues that the Court made manifest errors in issuing its findings of fact and conclusions of law. A review of VRC's Motion, however, reveals that VRC is simply making the same arguments that were made at trial and in VRC's prior briefing to this Court. VRC has not demonstrated prejudicial error or substantial injustice; therefore, the Court DENIES VRC's Motion for New Trial. The Court's Judgment of December 21, 2004 remains in force.
SO ORDERED.