Riley v. Outlook Nebraska, Inc.

Filing 79

ORDER denying 73 Motion to Amend the findings and judgment. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (JSF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
ROBERT RILEY,
Plaintiff,

8:12CV168

vs.
ORDER
OUTLOOK NEBRASKA, INC.,
Defendant.

This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion to amend the findings and
judgment, Filing No. 73, of this court, Filing Nos. 66 and 67. The court has carefully
reviewed the motion, and declines to grant it. Generally, a motion to amend is filed for
the purpose of fixing a clerical or glaring error in the memorandum and order. The
purpose of Rule 52(b) is to provide the court an opportunity to correct manifest errors of
law or fact at trial. Lincoln Provision, Inc. v. Aron Puretz, PMP, LLC, 2013 WL 6283736,
at *2 (D. Neb. Dec. 4, 2013); Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(b). Motions made under Rule 52(b) “are
not intended merely to re-litigate old matters nor are such motions intended to allow the
parties to present the case under new theories of law.” Pro Edge L.P. v. Gue, 377 F.
Supp.2d 694, 698 (N.D. Iowa 2005). In this case, plaintiff is merely revisiting the facts
and law previously decided by this court and making the same arguments previously
made to this court. The court declines to relitigate these same issues. Accordingly, the
court will deny the motion.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to amend the findings and
judgment, Filing No. 73, is denied.
Dated this 16th day of September, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge