Taylor v. Augusta-Richmond County Consolidated Government, Commissioner(s), et.al. et al

Filing 46

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 42 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 04/27/2015. (jah)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION

WARREN ADAM TAYLOR,

*

Plaintiff,

*
*

v.

*
AUGUSTA-RICHMOND

COUNTY

CV

114-231

*

CONSOLIDATED COMMISSIONERS;

*

MAYOR DAVID S.

*

COPENHAVER;

MAYOR PRO TEM COREY JOHNSON;
J.

PATRICK CLAIBORNE;

GWENDOLYN B.

*

and

*

TAYLOR,

*

Defendants.

*

ORDER

Now

before

Reconsideration.

the

Court

(Doc. 42.)

is

Plaintiff s

for

On April 16, 2015, Plaintiff filed an

objection to this Court's March 16,

2015 Order directing him to

respond to a pending motion to dismiss.
objection,

Motion

(Docs. 37 & 39.)

In his

Plaintiff requested that this Court vacate and remand

his case to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which previously

dismissed his

38.)

notice

of

appeal

for lack

of

jurisdiction.

(Doc.

On April 17, 2015, the Court - after warning Plaintiff in an

earlier Order - dismissed this action without prejudice for want of
prosecution.

With

(Doc. 40.)

his

reconsideration

current

of

the

motion,

Court's

Plaintiff

April

17,

appears

2015

Order,

to

seek

which

in

addition to dismissing his case for failure to prosecute overruled

the aforementioned objection.
quotes CSX Transp.,
that

"[a]

judgment

litigation
district
Fed.

After

is

Civ.

quoting

does

final

certifies
P.

or

not

effectively

immediately

the

54(b)."

this

judgment

235

language,

F.3d

appealable

for

1327

asks

appeal

(11th

the

eight days

or amend a

after

the

judgment in

entry of

the

a civil

judgment.

does not set forth the grounds for relief,
Circuit

have

order:

(1)

an

availability

error

or

identified

three

intervening

of

new

prevent

that

change

to

certify

(Doc.

evidence;

manifest

and

Ga. 2005); Sussman v. Salem,
694

(M.D.

Ga.

to

be

not

of

employed

Catering & Serv.

2004)

reconsideration

law;

the

of

correct

need

to

See,

F. Supp.

Saxon & Nielsen,

a previous

sparingly.'"

Int'l, N.V.,

(citation omitted).

an

59(e)

e.g.,

2d 1330,
P.A.,

(2)

Ctr.
1337

153 F.R.D.

an

the

clear

for
(N.D.
689,

1994).

"[R]econsideration

remedy,

385

within twenty-

district courts in this

injustice.

Biological Diversity v. Hamilton,

a party may

controlling

(3)

42.)

Although Rule

merit

in

under
2000).

Court

case

the

Cir.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e),

alter

the

unless

immediate

1325,

Plaintiff

terminate

the judgment so he may appeal to the Eleventh Circuit.

seek to

Plaintiff

v. City of Garden City for the proposition

that

not

court

R.

Inc.

In support of his motion,

appeal,

reconsideration to

and

order

is

"an extraordinary

Williams

320 F. Supp.

2d 1347,

v.

Cruise

1358

Ships

(S.D. Fla.

In fact, a motion for reconsideration is

thus

"ask the

it
Court

is
to

improper

on

rethink what

a
the

motion
Court

for
ha[s]

already

thought

Inc.

Mel

v.

1983),

15,

Bohannan

at *1

Inc.,

No.

2008) .

A

(S.D.

movant

nature

decision."

Cover

Fla.

1993)

Plaintiff

presents
the

Court

Fla.

to
v.

must

forth

the

Wal-Mart

reconsider

its

Ins.

Co.,

2009)

meet

the

Belt,

99,

101

No.

08-23183,

at *1

or

to

(E.D.

Inc.,

(N.D.

law of

reverse
148

Va.

2009
Carey

Ga.

Dec.

strongly

a

its

F.R.D.

prior

294,

294

(emphasis added).
this

demanding

based in fact

prior

Above

and Vidinliey v.

facts

court

Stores,

absolutely no argument,
to

F.R.D.

2008 WL 5459335,

"set

to

99

June 11,

induce

failed

wrongly."

Transp.

(citation omitted)
has

or

Inc.,

v.

l:07-cv-762,

convincing

(M.D.

rightly

Roofing,

quoted in Weitz Co.

WL 1636125,
Int'l,

through —

decision.

standard.

or law,
Instead,

He

to induce
he

simply

states that he is asking for reconsideration so that he may appeal
to

the Eleventh Circuit.

Reconsideration

(doc.

42)

For this

reason,

Plaintiff's

Motion

for

is DENIED.

ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, this <^7- day of April,
2015.

HOltoRaBfiE TT.' RANDAL HAL]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA