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).

Download PDF
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

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?