Riggins v. Jones et al
ORDER denying 28 Motion to Supplement/incorporate which the court construes as a motion for reconsideration, as set out. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 8/8/2012.(copy mailed) (cmj)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
DARRYL D. RIGGINS,
J.H. JONES, et al,
CIVIL ACTION 12-00284-KD-M
This action is before the Court on the plaintiff Darryl D. Riggins’s “Motion for Leave to
Incorporate” which this Court construes as a motion for reconsideration.1 (Doc. 28) Upon
consideration, and for the reasons set forth herein, the motion is DENIED.
Generally, “[a] motion to reconsider is only available when a party presents the court
with evidence of an intervening change in controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or
the need to correct clear error or manifest injustice.” Summit Med. Ctr. of Ala., Inc. v. Riley, 284
F. Supp. 2d 1350, 1355 (M.D. Ala. 2003). A motion for reconsideration “cannot be brought
solely to relitigate issues already raised in an earlier motion.” Harris v. Corrections Corp. of
America, 2011 WL 2672553, 1 (11th Cir. July 11, 2011) citing Michael Linet, Inc. v. Village of
Wellington, 408 F.3d 757, 763 (11th Cir. 2005).
Review of the allegations in the motion to incorporate and the objection shows that
Riggins raised the same argument in both: That the nurses gave his prescription medications to
the officers who then gave him the medication in violation of protocol for dispensing medication
Riggins is a pro se plaintiff. Therefore, the documents are given a liberal construction in the
and that he had repeatedly been served fish to which he is allergic. Reconsideration is not
available where the arguments and issues raised have already been heard and decided by the
Court. Therefore, the motion is due to be denied.
DONE this the 8th day of August, 2012.
s / Kristi K. DuBose
KRISTI K. DuBOSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?