Bell v. Jenne et al

Filing 66

ORDER denying 63 Plaintiff's Motion Moving the Court to Vacate its Previous Order on its Award of Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan on 8/24/2010. (tro)

Bell v. Jenne et al

Doc. 66

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 09-61426-CIV-HUCK/O'SULLIVAN ALVIN BELL, Plaintiff, v. KEN JENNE, et al, Defendants. _________________________/ ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiff's Motion Moving the Court to Vacate its Previous Order on its Award of Attorney Fees to the Defendant/Appellee (DE # 63, 8/6/10). Having reviewed the applicable filings and the law, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED the Plaintiff's Motion Moving the Court to Vacate its Previous Order on its Award of Attorney Fees to the Defendant/Appellee (DE # 63, 8/6/10) is DENIED. This motion fails to raise any new issue or evidence. A motion for reconsideration should raise new issues and not merely "reiterate arguments previously made." Z.K. Marine, Inc. v. M/V Archigetis et al., 808 F. Supp. 1561, 1563 (S.D. Fla. 1992). Generally, there are three grounds justifying reconsideration of an order: (1) an intervening change in controlling law; (2) availability of new evidence; and (3) the need to correct clear error or manifest injustice. Wendy's International, Inc. v. Nu-Cape Construction, Inc., 169 F.R.D. 680, 684 (M.D. Fl. 1996). The plaintiff has not provided

Dockets.Justia.com

any facts or law justifying reconsideration of this Court's Order. DONE AND ORDERED, in Chambers, at Miami, Florida, this 24th day of August, 2010.

JOHN J. O'SULLIVAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Copies furnished to: United States District Judge Huck All Counsel of Record