Goings v. Benefield, 16-CV-489-SMY-RJD. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20190819b40
Visitors: 12
Filed: Aug. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 16, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STACI M. YANDLE , District Judge . Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Frederick Goings' Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Goings seeks reconsideration of the Order granting summary judgment in favor of Dr. Mia Galioto on Count 18, a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress regarding statements made in a medical record dated February 6, 2015 (Doc. 300). Judgment has not been entered in this case. Therefore, Go
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STACI M. YANDLE , District Judge . Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Frederick Goings' Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Goings seeks reconsideration of the Order granting summary judgment in favor of Dr. Mia Galioto on Count 18, a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress regarding statements made in a medical record dated February 6, 2015 (Doc. 300). Judgment has not been entered in this case. Therefore, Goi..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STACI M. YANDLE, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Frederick Goings' Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). Goings seeks reconsideration of the Order granting summary judgment in favor of Dr. Mia Galioto on Count 18, a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress regarding statements made in a medical record dated February 6, 2015 (Doc. 300). Judgment has not been entered in this case. Therefore, Goings is not entitled to relief pursuant to Rule 59(e), which allows for judgments to be amended or altered. And, Goings is not entitled to relief under Rule 54(b) which allows the Court to revise decisions as to individual claims prior to entry of judgment. Goings has set forth no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant relief. See Bank of Waunakee v. Rochester Cheese Sales, Inc., 906 F.2d 1185, 1190 (7th Cir. 1990); Caisse Nationale de Credit Agricole v. CBI Indus., Inc., 90 F.3d 1262, 1269 (7th Cir. 1996). Instead, he merely rehashes arguments already made and rejected. Id. The Motion is accordingly DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
