Dreding v. Toney

Filing 37

ORDER denying 36 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 6/20/2011. Copies to parties. (sdb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
BURNICE TAFT DREDING, JR.,
Petitioner,
vs.
DEBORAH TONEY,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION 10-0525-KD-M

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s “Appeal and Motion to File Second or
Successive Petition” (Doc. 36).

The Court construes Petitioner’s filing as a motion to

reconsider,1 and because the Petitioner has not articulated grounds meriting reconsideration it is
ORDERED that the Petitioner’s motion (Doc. 36) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED this the 20th day of June 2011.
/s/ Kristi K. DuBose
KRISTI K. DuBOSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

The decision to grant or deny a motion to reconsider is left to the discretion of the trial court.
Chapman v. AI Transport, 229 F.3d 1012, 1023-1024 (11th Cir. 2000) (en banc). “In the interest of finality
and conservation of scarce judicial resources, reconsideration of an order is an extraordinary remedy and
is employed sparingly.” Gougler v. Sirius Products, Inc., 370 F. Supp. 2d 1185, 1189 (S.D. Ala. 2005)
(citation omitted).