Triemert et al v. Washington County et al

Filing 45

ORDER denying 43 Motion. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 12/14/11. (kll) (cc: Hospitality Contractors of Minnesota, LLC, David B. Triemert) Modified on 12/14/2011 (akl).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

David B. Triemert and Hospitality Contractors
of Minnesota, LLC,
Plaintiffs,
Civ. No. 11-2351 (RHK/FLN)
ORDER
v.
Washington County, William Hutton, and
James Schug,
Defendants.
By Order dated November 14, 2011, the Court granted Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss due to Plaintiffs’ lack of standing. Plaintiffs now move the Court for a “new
trial” (Doc. No. 43), but no trial was held in this case. Rather, the Court construes
Plaintiffs’ Motion as a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration under Local
Rule 7.1(h) and/or a motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
60(b). Yet, Plaintiffs raise no new arguments or offer any new evidence demonstrating
that they have standing. They simply disagree with the Court’s prior ruling, an improper
basis for either reconsideration or relief from judgment. They also argue that they should
have been permitted to amend their Complaint, but such an amendment cannot cure their
lack of standing. Lastly, they argue that “granting legal fees against [them] in this case” is
improper, but there has been no fee award. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Motion is DENIED.

Dated: December 14, 2011

s/Richard H. Kyle
RICHARD H. KYLE
United States District Judge