Securities and Exchange Commission v. BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. et al

Filing 314

ORDER denying 308 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Darrin P. Gayles on 9/16/2014. (hs01)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
Case No. 12-60082-CIV-GAYLES/TURNOFF
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BANKATLANTIC BANCORP, INC. and
ALAN B. LEVAN,
Defendants.
/
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Defendants’ Corrected Motion for
Reconsideration of the Prior Judge’s Ruling that Alan Levan’s July 25, 2007 Statements were
False and Incorporated Memorandum of Law [ECF 308]. The Court has carefully reviewed the
Motion, the parties’ submissions, the record, and the applicable law.
“Courts have distilled three major grounds justifying reconsideration: (1) an intervening
change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence; and (3) the need to correct clear
error or manifest injustice.” Instituto de Prevision Militar v. Lehman Bros., Inc., 485 F. Supp. 2d
1340, 1342 (S.D. Fla. 2007) (quoting Cover v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 148 F.R.D. 294, 295 (M.D.
Fla. 1993)) (internal quotation marks omitted). Arguments that were or should have been raised
in the first instance are not appropriate grounds for a motion for reconsideration. See Gougler v.
Sirius Prods., Inc., 370 F. Supp. 2d 1185, 1189 (S.D. Ala. 2005). Furthermore, “[i]t is an
improper use of >the motion to reconsider to ask the Court to rethink what the Court already
thought through B rightly or wrongly.’” Z.K. Marine, Inc. v. M/V Archigetis, 808 F. Supp. 1561,
1563 (S.D. Fla. 1992) (quoting Above the Belt, Inc. v. Mel Bohannan Roofing, Inc., 99 F.R.D. 99,

101 (E.D. Va. 1983)).

The reconsideration decision is granted only in extraordinary

circumstances and is “committed to the sound discretion of the district judge.” Tristar Lodging,
Inc. v. Arch Specialty Ins. Co., 434 F. Supp. 2d 1286, 1301 (M.D. Fla. 2006) (quoting Am. Home
Assur. Co. v. Glenn Estess & Assocs., Inc., 763 F.2d 1237, 1238-39 (11th Cir. 1985)) (internal
quotations omitted).
Despite Defendants’ arguments to the contrary, the Court finds no clear error or manifest
injustice in the prior judge’s rulings. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants’ Corrected Motion for Reconsideration
of the Prior Judge’s Ruling that Alan Levan’s July 25, 2007 Statements were False and
Incorporated Memorandum of Law [ECF 308] is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 16th day of September,
2014.

________________________________
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc:

Magistrate Judge Turnoff
All Counsel of Record