Rule 59.New trial; altering or amending a judgment

Before taking a case up on appeal, a party who thinks something went wrong at trial can ask the same court to fix it. Rule 59 lays out seven grounds for a new trial: irregularities in the proceedings or an abuse of discretion that denied a fair trial, jury misconduct, accident or surprise that ordinary care couldn't have prevented, newly discovered evidence that couldn't have been found and used at trial with reasonable diligence, damages so excessive or inadequate they look driven by passion or prejudice, evidence too thin to support the verdict, or a verdict that's contrary to law or rests on a legal error. The motion must be filed within 28 days of the judgment's entry, and if it relies on the first four grounds — irregularity, misconduct, surprise, or new evidence — it needs supporting affidavits or declarations served along with it.

After a trial without a jury, the court has extra flexibility on a new-trial motion: it can reopen the judgment, take more testimony, revise or add findings of fact and conclusions of law, and enter a new judgment based on the fuller record. The court doesn't need a party to ask, either — within that same 28-day window, it can order a new trial on its own for any reason that would justify granting one on a party's motion, though if it wants to grant a timely motion for a reason the party didn't raise, it must give notice and a chance to be heard first, and it must explain its reasoning in the order. Separately, a motion to alter or amend the judgment — asking the court to change the judgment itself rather than start over with a new trial — faces the same 28-day deadline unless another rule or statute says otherwise.