UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Nicole Corin Christian

v. Civil No. 05-cv-356-JD

Travis W. Anderson, et al

O R D E R

Nicole Corin Christian, proceeding pro se, moves for partial

reconsideration and "articulation" of the court's order granting

summary judgment in favor of the Grafton County defendants. She

contends that the order is based on factual errors and is

unclear. The defendants object to her motion.

When a party files a post-judgment motion within ten days of

the entry of judgment that is the subject of the motion, it is

considered under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Global

Naps, Inc. v. Verizon New England, Inc., 489 F.3d 13, 25 (1st

Cir. 2007). To succeed on a motion for reconsideration, the

moving party must demonstrate newly discovered evidence, a

manifest legal error, or that the court has missed material

facts. Palmer v. Champion Mortgage, 465 F.3d 24, 30 (1st Cir.

2006). In the absence of factual or legal error, the moving

party cannot revisit arguments that were or should have been

presented before judgment entered. See id.; DiMarco-Zappa v.

Cabanillas, 238 F.3d 25, 34 (1st Cir. 2001).

Case 1:05-cv-00356-JD Document 92 Filed 10/15/07 Page 1 of 4
2

Discussion

In support of her motion, Christian contends that the court

ignored evidence that the Grafton County Department of

Corrections had a strip search policy in place when she was

detained there. She also asserts that the court's order contains

factual mistakes and inconsistencies that she asks be corrected

in anticipation of her appeal.

A. Policy

The Grafton County defendants asserted that Christian failed

to bring claims against the county and, alternatively, that

Christian lacked evidence that any of the constitutional claims

she raised were perpetrated pursuant to a county policy or

practice. Christian did not dispute the defendants' argument

that the county was not a party, but nevertheless she asserted

that the county had a policy of requiring new arrestees to

undress in front of a corrections officer. Christian provided

and cited only the county's policy after December of 2003, to

support that theory. The court concluded that if the county were

a party, Christian had failed to show municipal liability.

For reconsideration, Christian asserts that the court erred

in overlooking a county policy submitted by the defendants, dated

March of 2000. That policy, Christian asserts, required new

Case 1:05-cv-00356-JD Document 92 Filed 10/15/07 Page 2 of 4
3

arrestees, like her, to remove all of their clothing and to stand

naked in front of a corrections officer. She contends that the

clothing policy, therefore, amounted to a strip search policy.

Christian neglected to reference or discuss the March 2000

county policy in her opposition to summary judgment, which was

instead based on the county's written policy in 2003. As such,

she is barred from raising it now. In addition, the policy she

cites does not require arrestees to stand naked in front of a

corrections officer, and, even if it did, such a requirement

would not necessarily constitute a strip search policy. See Wood

v. Hancock County Sheriff's Dep't, 354 F.3d 57, 65 (1st Cir.

2003). Therefore, Christian fails to raise grounds for

reconsideration of summary judgment in favor of the county.

B. Inconsistencies

Christian faults the court for concluding that the

defendants failed to show, as a matter of law, that Christian's

clothing exchange process was not a strip search but that the

defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on that claim. 

Christian's arguments demonstrate her lack of understanding of

the doctrine of qualified immunity. After reviewing that part of

the order, the court is satisfied that it is not legally or

factually erroneous.

Case 1:05-cv-00356-JD Document 92 Filed 10/15/07 Page 3 of 4
4

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff's motion for

reconsideration (document no. 90) is denied.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

October 15, 2007

cc: Charles P. Bauer, Esquire

Lisa Lee, Esquire

Daniel J. Mullen, Esquire

Frank H. Olmstead, Esquire

Nancy J. Smith, Esquire

Nicole Corin Christian, pro se

Case 1:05-cv-00356-JD Document 92 Filed 10/15/07 Page 4 of 4