Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company, Successor By Merger To Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation

Filing 28

ORDER denying 27 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank, Plaintiff, Case No. 14-13706 v. Hon. John Corbett O’Meara FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Successor by Merger to Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, Defendant. _____________________________________/ ORDER DENYING FIDELITY’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Before the court is Defendant Fidelity National Title Insurance Company’s motion for reconsideration of the court’s opinion and order dismissing Fidelity’s counter-complaint. Specifically, Fidelity seeks reconsideration of the court’s dismissal of its gross negligence defense. The standard for granting a motion for reconsideration is as follows: Generally, and without restricting the court’s discretion, the court will not grant motions for rehearing or reconsideration which merely present the same issues ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication. The movant shall not only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the court and the parties have been misled but also show that correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case. LR 7.1(h)(3). A motion for reconsideration “is not properly used as a vehicle to rehash old arguments or to advance positions that could have been argued earlier but were not.” Smith v. Mount Pleasant Schools, 298 F. Supp.2d 636, 637 (E.D. Mich. 2003) (citing Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Engler, 146 F.3d 357, 374 (6th Cir. 1998)). In its motion for reconsideration, Fidelity argues that its gross negligence defense is valid, an argument considered and rejected by the court. Upon review, the court finds that Fidelity has not demonstrated a “palpable defect” by which the court and the parties have been misled. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Fidelity’s motion for reconsideration is DENIED. s/John Corbett O’Meara United States District Judge Date: November 12, 2015 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on this date, November 12, 2015, using the ECF system. s/William Barkholz 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?