Barnes v. City of Gray, Georgia et al

Filing 16

ORDER denying 11 Motion for Reconsideration ; denying 15 Motion for Hearing. Ordered by Judge C. Ashley Royal on 10/20/10 (lap)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION WILLIAM A. BARNES, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF GRAY, GEORGIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF GRAY, COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAY, CHARLIE H. RIDLEY, DEFENDANTS. _______________________________ : : : : : : : : : : :

Civil Action No. 5:09- CV-332 (CAR)

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Currently before the Court are Plaintiff's pro se Motion for Reconsideration [Doc. 11] and Plaintiff's Motion for Hearing [Doc. 15]. Plaintiff requests that the Court reconsider its prior order dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim [Doc. 9]. Because Plaintiff has failed to est ablish any grounds for reconsideration, Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion for Hearing is also DENIED. "Motions for reconsideration should be granted only if: (1) there has been an intervening change in controlling law; (2) new evidence has been discovered; or (3) reconsideration is needed to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice." Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Hamilton, 385 F. Supp. 2d 1330, 1337 (N.D. Ga. 2005). The thrust of Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is hardly clear, but it can be best described as simply recapitulating the allegations raised in his complaint . The motion points to no intervening change of law or newly discovered evidence. Plaintiff has also failed to convince the Court that it committed clear error in its previous order or that reconsideration is necessary to prevent manifest injustice. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for

Reconsideration is denied. Having determined that Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is due to be denied, Plaintiff's Motion for Hearing is denied as moot.

SO ORDERED this 20th day of October, 2010.
S/ C. Ashley Royal C. ASHLEY ROYAL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

bcw