Martin v. McDaniel et al.

Filing 62

ORDER DENYING 61 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis, which the Court construes as a Motion for Reconsideration. Ordered by Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 5/22/2013. (tlh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION JAMES M. MARTIN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Lieutenant JOHNNY McDANIEL , ) ) Defendant. ) ________________________________) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:11-CV-192 (MTT) ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s “appeal” of this Court’s Order (Doc. 60) denying the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis, which the Court construes as a Motion for Reconsideration. (Doc. 61). Pursuant to Local Rule 7.6, “Motions for Reconsideration shall not be filed as a matter of routine practice.” M.D. Ga. L.R. 7.6. “Reconsideration is appropriate only if the movant demonstrates (1) that there has been an intervening change in the law, (2) that new evidence has been discovered which was not previously available to the parties in the exercise of due diligence, or (3) that the court made a clear error of law.” Bingham v. Nelson, 2010 WL 339806, at *1 (M.D. Ga.) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “In order to demonstrate clear error, the party moving for reconsideration must do more than simply restate his prior arguments, and any arguments which the party inadvertently failed to raise earlier are deemed waived.” McCoy v. Macon Water Auth., 966 F. Supp. 1209, 1223 (M.D. Ga. 1997) (emphasis added). Here, the Plaintiff has not met his burden. He has alleged no intervening change in the law, has presented no new evidence not previously available to the parties, and the Court is not persuaded its previous ruling was clearly erroneous. Contrary to the Plaintiff’s assertions that this Court “has not contended [he] could not proceed in good faith” nor “presented such an Order that it should not except (sic)” the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis,1 this Court has in fact entered such an Order (Doc. 60) certifying that an appeal in forma pauperis cannot be taken in good faith. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. SO ORDERED, this the 22nd day of May, 2013. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                                                                1 Doc. 61 at 1-2.

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?