Lamb v. Upton et al

Filing 52

ORDER denying 40 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge B. Avant Edenfield on 2/8/2010. (loh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA STATESBORO DIVISION

7/19/02) (unpublished). Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is, therefore, DENIED. Doc. # 40.

THEOWANDA LAMB, Plaintiff, v. STEVE UPTON, et al., Defendants. 608CV093

This day of 8 February 2010.

41. 'BIAVANT EDENFIELŲ, RIDGE )
UN1TEJ) STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

96L

ORDER

The Court recently adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), recommending the dismissal -- for failure to state a claim -of certain defendants and of several claims against certain other defendants in inmateplaintiff Theowanda Lamb's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit. Doc. ## 13 (R&R), 36 (Adoption Order). Lamb has since filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Adoption Order, urging that his objections to the R&R showed that he did in fact state actionable claims against the defendants. Doc. # 40. "Reconsideration may be necessary if there is (1) newly discovered evidence, (2) an intervening development or change in controlling law, or (3) the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice." Jersawitz v. People TV, 71 F. Supp. 2d 1330, 1344 (N.D. Ga. 1999). However, a reconsideration motion "is not an opportunity for the moving party to instruct the court on how the court could have done it better the first time." Id. (quotes, cite and alteration omitted). Nor is it an appropriate vehicle to "reiterate arguments previously made." Burger King Corp. v. Hinton, Inc., 2002 WL 31059465 at *1 (S.D. Fla.