Opinion ID: 6112077
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Motion to Alter the Judgment

Text: Plaintiff’s final argument is that the district court erred by denying his motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). “[An] appeal from the denial of a Rule 59(e) motion is treated as an appeal from the underlying judgment itself.” GenCorp, Inc. v. Am. Int’l Underwriters, 178 F.3d 804, 833 (6th Cir. 1999). Because we are reversing the district court’s grant of summary judgment on his age discrimination claims, this analysis is limited to Plaintiff’s challenges of the retaliation and bad faith arguments. For the same reasons explained above in the analyses addressing Plaintiff’s retaliation and bad faith arguments, the district court’s denial of his motion to alter or amend was proper. -28- No. 21-3115, Aday v. Westfield Ins. Co., et al. Consequently, we affirm the district court’s denial of Plaintiff’s motion to alter or amend the judgment as it relates to his retaliation and bad faith arguments.