Reed

Filing 40

ORDER Denying Appellant's 39 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

GREGORY J. REED et al.,
Case No. 15-cv-14462
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

Appellant,
v.
KENNETH A. NATHAN
Appellee.
______________________________________/

ORDER DENYING APPELLANT’S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (ECF #39)
On October 11, 2016, this Court entered an Amended Opinion and Order
that affirmed the Bankruptcy Court’s January 4, 2016, Amended Order Requiring
Turnover of Assets (the “Opinion and Order”). (See ECF #37.) On October 25,
2016, Appellant Keeper of the Word Foundation (“KWF”) filed a timely motion
asking the Court to reconsider its ruling (the “Motion for Reconsideration”). (See
ECF #39.)
On a motion for reconsideration, a movant must demonstrate that the Court
was misled by a “palpable defect.” E.D. Mich. L.R. 7.1(h)(3). A “palpable defect”
is a defect that is obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest, or plain. See Witzke v.
Hiller, 972 F.Supp. 426, 427 (E.D. Mich. 1997). The movant must also show that
the defect, if corrected, would “result in a different disposition of the case.” E.D.
1

Mich. L.R. 7.1(h)(3). A motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle to rehash old
arguments, or to proffer new arguments or evidence that the movant could have
presented earlier. See Sault Ste. Marie v. Engler, 146 F.3d 367, 374 (6th Cir.
1998).
The Court has reviewed the Motion for Reconsideration and concludes that
KWF has failed to demonstrate that the Court was misled by a “palpable defect.”
Nor has KWF established that the correction of such a defect would result in a
different disposition of its appeal.

Finally, while KWF asks the Court for

additional time to retain new counsel and file additional objections to the Opinion
and Order, the Court is not persuaded that such an extension is in the interest of
justice.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
that the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.

s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: October 26, 2016
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on October 26, 2016, by electronic means and/or
ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]
2