Pflueger v. Credit Bureau Services, Inc., et al

Filing 68

ORDER - Defendants' motion for partial reconsideration (filing 57 ) is denied. Defendants' motion for oral argument (filing 67 ) is denied. Ordered by Chief Judge John M. Gerrard. (LKO)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
AARON PFLUEGER,
Plaintiff,

4:17-CV-3092

vs.
ORDER
CREDIT BUREAU SERVICES, INC.
and AMANDA BARRON,
Defendants.
The defendants filed a motion for partial reconsideration (filing 57) of
the Court's order (filing 56) denying the defendants' motion for summary
judgment (filing 43) regarding their claim to the bona fide error defense (15
U.S.C. § 1692k(c)).
But it is well-settled that motions to reconsider serve a limited function:
to correct manifest errors of law or fact, or to present newly discovered
evidence. Arnold v. ADT Sec. Servs., Inc., 627 F.3d 716, 721 (8th Cir. 2010);
Zhai v. Cent. Ne. Orthopedics & Sports Med., P.C., 4:16-CV-3049, 2018 WL
582461, at *1 (D. Neb. Jan. 28, 2018). Absent a showing of manifest error in
the prior ruling, or absent new facts or legal authority, which the movant was
unable to present with reasonable diligence in the first instance, a motion to
reconsider will be denied. Zhai, 2018 WL 582461, at *1 (citing Activision TV,
Inc. v. Bruning, 8:13-CV-215, 2014 WL 1350278, at 1 (D. Neb. Apr. 4, 2014)).
The defendants have not presented any new evidence or legal authority
in support of their motion. Nor have the defendants pointed to any manifest

error in the Court's previous order.1 The defendants merely reargue that which
the Court has already considered. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1.

Defendants' motion for partial reconsideration (filing 57) is
denied.

2.

Defendants' motion for oral argument (filing 67) is denied.

Dated this 4th day of February, 2019.
BY THE COURT:

John M. Gerrard
Chief United States District Judge

1

Manifest error concerns a wholesale disregard, misapplication or failure to recognize

controlling precedent on the part of the court. Alien Tech. Corp. v. Intermec, Inc., 3:06-CV-51,
2010 WL 5174482, at *3 (D.N.D. Dec. 15, 2010).

2