Stinson Farm And Ranch LLC v. Overflow Energy LLC

Filing 37

ORDER denying 30 Motion for Reconsideration re 17 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Overflow Energy LLC. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 1/28/16. (jw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
STINSON FARM AND RANCH, L.L.C.,
Plaintiff,
v.
OVERFLOW ENERGY, L.L.C.
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIV-14-1400-R

ORDER
The Court granted Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, whereupon Plaintiff
filed a Motion to Reconsider (Doc. No. 30), pursuant to Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. Defendant responded in opposition to the motion, and Plaintiff has filed a reply
in support of its position. Having considered the parties' submissions, the Court finds as
follows.
"[A] motion for reconsideration is appropriate where the court has misapprehended
the facts, a party's position, or the controlling law." Servants of Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d
1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000). Plaintiff contends the Court erred in multiple respects, with
regard to both legal and factual conclusions. The Court, however, has reviewed the motion
and response, its Order granting summary judgment and the parties' briefing addressing the
issue of summary judgment. Although Plaintiff disagrees with the Court's conclusion that he
received that which he bargained for, that is the negotiated price in exchange for the
unrestricted transfer of the property at issue herein, the Court declines to exercise its

discretion to grant Plaintiff's motion to reconsider. Defendant's request for attorney's fees is
similarly denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of January, 2016.

2