Reynolds v. Mouridy et al

Filing 24

ORDER denying 21 Motion for Reconsideration. The action remains DISMISSED. Ordered by Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 12/23/2010. (tlh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION John Bartow REYNOLDS, ) ) ) v. ) ) Glenn MOURIDY, et. al, ) ) Defendants. ) ________________________________ ) Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:10-CV-249 (MTT) ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (the "Motion") (Doc. 21). The Court dismissed the action because the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. As the Court wrote, "Although the Plaintiff may, in fact, have a valid claim arising from the foreclosure in this case, the Court is unable to construe any viable legal theory or factual basis on which Plaintiff's claims could rest." The Plaintiff's Motion does not resolve this deficiency. And in any event, a Motion to reconsider is not sufficient or effective to save a complaint such as the one filed by the Plaintiff in this case. The Plaintiff is reminded, however, that the Court dismissed this case without prejudice. Thus, the Plaintiff may be able to re-file his claim by filing a complaint in which the relief sought is clearly laid out, as well as the factual basis for such relief. The Plaintiff has shown no cause why this Court should reconsider its previous order. Therefore, the action remains DISMISSED. SO ORDERED, this the 23rd day of December, 2010. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT jch 2

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?