Wise v. Berghuis
Filing
17
OPINION AND ORDER denying 16 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ANGELO WISE,
Petitioner,
Case Number 2:13-cv-10360
Honorable Paul D. Borman
v.
MARY BERGHUIS,
Respondent.
______________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION [Dkt. 16]
Petitioner, Angelo Wise, a state prisoner, filed this case under 28 U.S.C. § 22541. On
February 15, 2013, the Court denied Petitioner’s motion for an evidentiary hearing without
prejudice. Petitioner has filed a motion for reconsideration. He state no basis whatsoever for
his motion. Rather, he simply states that he wishes the Court to reconsider its order.
Local Rule 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. Ford Motor Co. v.
Greatdomains.com, Inc., 177 F. Supp. 2d 628, 632 (E.D. Mich. 2001). The movant must not
only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the court and the parties have been misled but
also show that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof. A
palpable defect is a defect that is obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest, or plain. Witzke v.
Hiller, 972 F. Supp. 426, 427 (E.D. Mich. 1997). Because Petitioner has not shown any
reason why the Court’s prior order was erroneously entered, his motion for reconsideration
is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
s/Paul D. Borman
PAUL D. BORMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: February 3, 2014
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney
or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on February 3, 2014.
s/Deborah Tofil
Case Manager
-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?