Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center v. St. Bernard Parish et al

Filing 814

ORDER and REASONS denying 801 Motion for Reconsideration. FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants IMMEDIATELY authorize Entergy to release electricity to the building meters and individual apartment meters at the clubhouse and buildings 1, 2, 3, and 4 at the Woodcrest site; the clubhouse and buildings 1, 2, 3, and 4 at the Parc Place site, and buildings 1, 2, 3, and 4 at the Magnolia site. Signed by Judge Helen G. Berrigan on 10/17/11. (mm, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
GREATER NEW ORLEANS FAIR HOUSING
ACTION CENTER, ET. AL.

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO: 06-7185

ST. BERNARD PARISH, ET AL.

SECTION: “C” (1)

ORDER AND REASONS
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration of Order
Requiring the Release of Individual Apartment Meters and Building Meters. (Rec. Doc. 801).
Defendants’ Motion is DENIED for the following reasons.
The Fifth Circuit treats a motion for reconsideration as “either a motion ‘to alter or amend’
under Rule 59(e) or a motion for ‘relief from judgment’ under Rule 60(b).” Lavespere v. Niagara
Machine & Tool Works, Inc., 910 F.2d 167, 173 (5th Cir. 1990). If the motion is filed within ten
days of the order, it falls under Rule 59(e); otherwise, it falls under Rule 60(b). Id. In this case,
Defendants filed their Motion to Reconsider within 10 days of the October 7, 2011 Order, so it will
be treated as a Rule 59(e) Motion to Alter or Amend. (Rec. Docs. 801, 800).
Alteration or amendment of a previous ruling under Rule 59(e) “‘calls into question the
correctness of the judgment.’”

Tremplet v. Hydrochem Inc., 367 F.3d 473, 478 (5th Cir.

2004)(quoting In re Transtexas Gas Corp., 303 F.3d 571, 581 (5th Cir. 2002)). This motion serves
the “narrow purpose of allowing a party to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly
discovered evidence.” Waltman v. Int’l Paper Co., 875 F. 2d 468, 473 (5th Cir. 1989) (internal
quotations omitted). It may also be used to prevent manifest injustice. Flynn v. Terrebonne Parish
School Bd., 348 F. Supp. 2d 769, 771 (E.D. La. 2004). As such, it must be used sparingly. Clancy
v. Employers Health Ins. Co., 101 F. Supp. 2d 463, 465 (E.D. La. 2000).
1

Here, Defendants request this Court to reconsider its ruling granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for
an Order to Release Electrical Meters, but Defendants fail to satisfy Rule 59(e). They present no
newly discovered evidence and do not allege, much less present evidence of, manifest injustice or
manifest error of law or fact. Rather, Defendants repeat allegations and arguments from their
Opposition Memorandum to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Release of Electrical Meters. (Rec. Docs. 801-1,
777). Thus, Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration is inappropriate.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion is DENIED. (Rec. Doc. 801).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants IMMEDIATELY authorize Entergy to release
electricity to the building meters and individual apartment meters at the clubhouse and buildings 1,
2, 3, and 4 at the Woodcrest site; the clubhouse and buildings 1, 2, 3, and 4 at the Parc Place site,
and buildings 1, 2, 3, and 4 at the Magnolia site.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 17th day of October, 2011.

_______________________________________

HELEN G. BERRIGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2