Opinion ID: 2971436
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: MSI’s Cross-Appeal

Text: MSI contends on cross-appeal that district court erred by awarding a fixed sum for “life of the part” commissions. MSI asserts that it is entitled not only to commissions from the date of breach through the trial, but also to future commissions that have yet to accrue. Thus, MSI now seeks to amend the judgment under FED.R.CIV.P. 60(a). We agree with MSI that from the record it appears that the damages judgment did not fully reflect the jury verdict. Rule 60(a), however, is meant to correct clerical errors in the judgment. 6 Pruzinsky v. Gianetti (In re Walter), 282 F.3d 434, 440 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 885 (2002). The rule does not allow courts to “correct an error of substantive judgment.” Id. (citation omitted). Thus, we cannot make the substantive change to the district court judgment which MSI seeks. Our holding, however, does not prevent MSI from pursuing damages for commissions earned after the jury’s verdict through further litigation when such future commissions accrue.