McCray v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher on 10/16/2020. (c/m 10/16/2020 ols, Deputy Clerk)

Case 1:20-cv-00973-SAG Document 12 Filed 10/16/20 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
CHAMBERS OF
STEPHANIE A. GALLAGHER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

101 WEST LOMBARD STREET
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201
[phone]

October 16, 2020

LETTER MEMORANDUM
RE:

McCray v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Civil Case No. SAG-20-973

Dear Ms. McCray and Counsel:
Currently pending is Ms. McCray’s motion for reconsideration of this Court’s September
17, 2020 memorandum opinion, ECF 7, and separate order, ECF 8, affirming the ruling of the
Bankruptcy Court. ECF 9. I have reviewed her motion, along with the opposition and reply. ECF
10, 11. No hearing is necessary. See Loc. R. 105.6 (D. Md. 2018). For the reasons set forth
herein, the motion will be denied.
There is no formal rule permitting a “motion for reconsideration,” but Ms. McCray’s
motion appears to constitute a motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).
A Rule 59(e) motion “need not be granted unless the district court finds that there has been an
intervening change of controlling law, that new evidence has become available, or that there is a
need to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice.” Edokobi v. Toyota Motor Credit
Corp., 2019 WL 2250568, *2 (D. Md. May 24, 2019) (quoting Robinson v. Wix Filtration Corp.
LLC, 599 F.3d 403, 411 (4th Cir. 2010)). None of those factors are present here. While Ms.
McCray continues to reiterate the same arguments that this Court, and the Bankruptcy Court,
previously rejected in their opinions and orders, there is no basis for this Court to re-adjudicate its
earlier findings. A separate Order follows.
Sincerely yours,
/s/
Stephanie A. Gallagher
United States District Judge