Quatrine v. Berghuis

Filing 27

OPINION AND ORDER Denying the Motion for Reconsideration 26 . Signed by District Judge Denise Page Hood. (LSau)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CHARLES QUATRINE, Jr.,
Petitioner,
v.

Civil No. 2:10-CV-11603
HONORABLE DENISE PAGE HOOD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

MARY BERGHUIS,
Respondent,
____________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
On October 23, 2012, this Court denied petitioner’s motions for
appointment of counsel and for release on bail. Petitioner has now filed a motion
for reconsideration. For the reasons that follow, the motion is DENIED.
U.S. Dist.Ct. Rules, E.D. Mich. 7.1 (h) allows a party to file a motion for
reconsideration. However, a motion for reconsideration which presents the same
issues already ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable
implication, will not be granted. Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters v.
Holcroft L.L.C. 195 F. Supp. 2d 908, 911 (E.D. Mich. 2002)(citing to U.S. Dist.Ct.
Rules, E.D. Mich. 7.1 (g)(3)). A motion for reconsideration should be granted if
the movant demonstrates a palpable defect by which the court and the parties
have been misled and that a different disposition of the case must result from a
correction thereof. Id. A palpable defect is a defect that is obvious, clear,

1

unmistakable, manifest, or plain. Witzke v. Hiller, 972 F. Supp. 426, 427 (E.D.
Mich. 1997).
In his motion for reconsideration, petitioner essentially raises the same
arguments that he raised in his prior motions for the appointment of counsel and
for release on bond and which were considered by the Court when denying
petitioner’s motions. The Court will deny petitioner’s motion for reconsideration,
because petitioner is merely presenting issues which were already ruled upon by
this Court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, when the Court denied
petitioner’s motions for the appointment of counsel and for release on bond. See
Hence v. Smith, 49 F. Supp. 2d 547, 553 (E.D. Mich. 1999).
Based upon the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for
reconsideration [Dkt. # 26] is DENIED.

S/Denise Page Hood
Denise Page Hood
United States District Judge
Dated: November 29, 2012
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon
Charles Quatrine #605639, 2500 S. Sheridan Drive, Muskegon Heights, MI
49444 and counsel of record on November 29, 2012, by electronic and/or
ordinary mail.
S/LaShawn R. Saulsberry
Case Manager

2