Mincy v. Klem et al
ORDER denying pltf's motion for reconsideration or reargument 204 of this Distric Court's order 202 & pltf's motion for depositions pending appeal 213 . (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 08/30/12. (ki)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
HILTON KARRIEM MINCY,
EDWARD KLEM, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07-CV-0790
AND NOW, this 30th day of August, 2012, upon consideration of plaintiff’s
“motion for reconsideration or reargument of this District’s Order (Doc. 202)
granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment” (Doc. 204), and it appearing
that plaintiff fails to demonstrate one of three major grounds for reconsideration
((1) an intervening change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence
[not available previously]; [or], (3) the need to correct clear error [of law] or prevent
manifest injustice.’”)), North River Ins. Co. v. Cigna Reinsurance Co., 52 F.3d 1194,
1218 (3d Cir. 1995) (collecting cases); see Waye v. First Citizen’s Nat’l Bank, 846 F.
Supp. 310, 314 (M.D. Pa.) (“A motion for reconsideration is not to be used to reargue
matters already argued and disposed of.”), aff’d, 31 F.3d 1174 (3d Cir. 1994); see also
Database America, Inc. v. Bellsouth Adver. & Publ’g Corp., 825 F. Supp. 1216, 1220
(D.N.J. 1993) (citations omitted) (“A party seeking reconsideration must show more
than a disagreement with the Court’s decision, and ‘recapitulation of the cases and
arguments considered by the court before rendering its original decision fails to
carry the moving party’s burden.’”), but, rather, reargues matters already argued
and disposed of by the Court, it is hereby ORDERED that:
Plaintiff’s “motion for reconsideration or reargument of this District’s
Order (Doc. 202) granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment”
(Doc. 204) is DENIED.
Plaintiff’s “motion for depositions pending appeal” (Doc. 213) is
S/ Christopher C. Conner
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
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?