Buggs v. Quintana
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: Pla's 6 Motion for Reconsideration Pursuant to Rule 59(e) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on January 14, 2013. (AWD) cc: Pla via US Mail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DIVISION OF KENTUCKY
CENTRAL DIVISION at LEXINGTON
CARL BUGGS, JR.,
FRANCISCO J. QUINTANA,
Civil Case No.
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion
for Reconsideration Pursuant to Rule 59(e) [D.E. 6], in
petition for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [De 4 &
“A motion under Rule 59(e) is not an opportunity to
(citing FDIC v. World Univ. Inc., 978 F.2d 10, 16 (1st Cir.
Instead, a Rule 59(e) motion may only be granted
evidence, an intervening change in controlling law, or to
Intern. Underwriters, 178 F.3d 804, 834 (6th Cir. 1999).
The Court has reviewed Petitioner’s motion and concludes
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for
Reconsideration Pursuant to Rule 59(e) [D.E. 6] shall be,
and the same hereby is, DENIED.
This the 14th day of January, 2013.
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?