152103P.pdf   07/14/2017  Lenny M. Chapman  v.  Missouri Basin Well Service
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-2103
                          and No:  15-2396
   U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - Bismarck   
   [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Murphy, Circuit Judge, and Montgomery, 
   District Judge] 
   Civil Case - diversity. The district court's application of Oklahoma law 
   rather the North Dakota law did not violate a fundamental public policy of 
   North Dakota under N.D. Cent. Code sec. 22-01-10, because the relevant 
   contract was not a motor carrier transportation contract. The district 
   court did not clearly err in granting the Chapmans' Rule 59(e) motion by 
   clarifying that the language "all amounts that have been paid or will be 
   paid" included the amounts paid by Hiland and Hiland's insurers. The 
   district court did not err in rejecting Missouri Basin's Rule 59(e) 
   motion, as the motion was an impermissible attempt to raise new arguments 
   that could have been raised earlier and, in any event, the rulings were 
   not inconsistent. Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion in 
   denying the Rule 59(e) motions. The district court orders are affirmed.