Filed: Jul. 21, 2017
Latest Update: Jul. 21, 2017
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD , Chief District Judge . In all four cases, the Court entered an order on June 30, 2017, denying Plaintiffs motions to vacate order for fraud on the Court and to reopen. On July 7, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a ^^response" and "final request to vacate, set asisde [sic] the judgment, and reopen the civil actions." The Court liberally construes these pro se filings as motions for reconsideration. Reconsideration is "an extraordinary remedy, which should be granted sparingl
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD , Chief District Judge . In all four cases, the Court entered an order on June 30, 2017, denying Plaintiffs motions to vacate order for fraud on the Court and to reopen. On July 7, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a ^^response" and "final request to vacate, set asisde [sic] the judgment, and reopen the civil actions." The Court liberally construes these pro se filings as motions for reconsideration. Reconsideration is "an extraordinary remedy, which should be granted sparingly..
More
ORDER
LISA GODBEY WOOD, Chief District Judge.
In all four cases, the Court entered an order on June 30, 2017, denying Plaintiffs§ motions to vacate order for fraud on the Court and to reopen. On July 7, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a ^^response" and "final request to vacate, set asisde [sic] the judgment, and reopen the civil actions." The Court liberally construes these pro se filings as motions for reconsideration. Reconsideration is "an extraordinary remedy, which should be granted sparingly." Deep Sea Fin., LLC v. QBE Ins., Ltd., No. CV 410-219, 2013 WL 1288972, at *2 (S.D. Ga. Mar. 27, 2013) (quoting Whitesell Corp. v. Electrolux Home Prods., Inc., No. CV 103-050, 2010 WL 4025943, at *7 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 13, 2010)). A court must balance "finality and judicial economy" against "the need to render just decisions." Id. (quoting Whitesell Corp., 2010 WL 4025943, at *7). Reconsideration "should not be used to relitigate issues which have already been found lacking." Id. (quoting Whitesell Corp., 2010 WL 4025943, at *7). It is only proper given legal changes, new evidence, or "the need to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice." Id. (quoting Whitesell Corp., 2010 WL 4025943, at *7).
Plaintiffs do not present legal changes or new evidence. There is no clear error of law or manifest injustice in the Court§s June 30, 2017 orders. The present motions are denied.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons above, in case number:
• 2:00-CV-158, dkt. no. 132 is DENIED;
• 2:09-CV-58, dkt. no. 87 is DENIED;
• 2:11-CV-91, dkt. no. 63 is DENIED; and
• 2:15-CV-24, dkt. no. 76 is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
