From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tipton v. Palmer

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Aug 13, 2010
3:09-CV-198-RCJ(VPC) (D. Nev. Aug. 13, 2010)

Opinion

3:09-CV-198-RCJ(VPC).

August 13, 2010


ORDER


Presently before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion For Reconsideration requesting relief from Judgment/Order (#19) filed on August 2, 2010.

Upon considering Tipton's arguments, all records on file and the relevant law, the court finds no basis to reconsider the Courts Order(#17) or Judgment (#18) entered on July 15, 2010.

LEGAL STANDARD

Motions to reconsider are generally avoided. See e.g., United States v. Mills, 810 F.2d 907, 909 (9th Cir. 1987) (stating that "[t]he law of the case doctrine provides that in order to maintain consistency during the course of a single case, reconsideration of questions previously decided should be avoided."); see also Earl Old Person v. Brown, 312 F.3d 1036, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (stating that exceptions to the law of the case doctrine include the following: (1) the prior decision is clearly erroneous and its enforcement would work a manifest injustice; (2) intervening controlling authority; and (3) substantially different evidence). That notwithstanding, Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) provides that "[o]n motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party . . . from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. . . ."

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Tipton's Motion for Reconsideration (#19) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Tipton v. Palmer

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Aug 13, 2010
3:09-CV-198-RCJ(VPC) (D. Nev. Aug. 13, 2010)
Case details for

Tipton v. Palmer

Case Details

Full title:DUANE C. TIPTON, Plaintiff, v. JACK PALMER, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Aug 13, 2010

Citations

3:09-CV-198-RCJ(VPC) (D. Nev. Aug. 13, 2010)