Strope v. Rice et al

Filing 57

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 55 Motion for Reconsideration Signed by District Judge Sam A. Crow on 9/5/2012.Mailed to pro se party Michael Lee Strope by regular mail (daw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS MICHAEL LEE STROPE also known as GORDON STROPE, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 08-3300-SAC ELIZABETH RICE, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 55). Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the court’s order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment and denying plaintiff’s motion for recusal. The grounds for granting a motion to reconsider “include (1) an intervening change in the controlling law, (2) new evidence previously unavailable, and (3) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice.” Servants of Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000). A motion to reconsider “should be denied unless it clearly demonstrates manifest error of law or fact or presents newly discovered evidence.” National Business Brokers, Ltd. v. Jim Williamson Products, Inc., 115 F.Supp.2d 1250, 1256 (D. Colo. 2000)(internal citations and punctuation omitted). Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration broadly alleges bias and challenges the court’s decision to grant summary judgment. The court has examined plaintiff’s motion carefully and has reviewed the Memorandum and Order denying his motion for recusal and granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The court finds no manifest error of law or fact nor any other legal basis for granting plaintiff’s request for relief from that order. IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 55) is denied. Copies of this order shall be transmitted to the parties. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: This 5th day of September, 2012, at Topeka, Kansas. S/ Sam A. Crow SAM A. CROW U.S. Senior District Judge 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?