Rules of civil procedure in state and federal courts often provide limited circumstances under which the court may alter or amend its judgment before it becomes final and appealable. Motions (requests) to alter or amend a judgment may also be referred to as requests to modify, correct, or reform a judgment.
For example, in Federal Court, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), the court may alter or amend its judgment if a motion is filed within 28 days after the court enters its judgment. But the grounds upon which the court may alter or amend its judgment are generally limited to circumstances such as:
• an intervening and material change in the law that impacts the outcome of the case;
• newly discovered evidence; or
• a clear error or manifest injustice.
In California, the rules of civil procedure allow for a court to alter or amend its judgment under certain circumstances, similar to the federal rules. Under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 663, a party may file a motion to vacate or modify a judgment if the court finds that there has been an incorrect or erroneous legal basis for the decision, or if the court acted without jurisdiction. Additionally, California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1008 allows for a motion for reconsideration if a party presents new or different facts, circumstances, or law that could not have been presented before the original judgment. The time frame for these motions is generally strict, with a motion to vacate needing to be filed within a reasonable time, not exceeding six months, and a motion for reconsideration needing to be filed within 10 days after service of written notice of entry of the order. In federal courts, Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits a party to file a motion to alter or amend a judgment within 28 days after the entry of the judgment, with the grounds for such a motion typically being limited to an intervening change in controlling law, new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice.