Filed: Jul. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2017
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION [Doc. 59] VICTORIA A. ROBERTS , District Judge . On June 20, 2017, the Court held a hearing on Defendants' motion to dismiss Leaf's First Amended Complaint. The Court ruled from the bench and granted Defendants' motion to dismiss with Prejudice. Martin Leaf ("Leaf") moves for reconsideration of that order. [Doc. 58, PgID 2403]. Local Rule 7.1(h)(3) provides the Court's standard for review of a motion for reconsideration: Generally, an
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION [Doc. 59] VICTORIA A. ROBERTS , District Judge . On June 20, 2017, the Court held a hearing on Defendants' motion to dismiss Leaf's First Amended Complaint. The Court ruled from the bench and granted Defendants' motion to dismiss with Prejudice. Martin Leaf ("Leaf") moves for reconsideration of that order. [Doc. 58, PgID 2403]. Local Rule 7.1(h)(3) provides the Court's standard for review of a motion for reconsideration: Generally, and..
More
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION [Doc. 59]
VICTORIA A. ROBERTS, District Judge.
On June 20, 2017, the Court held a hearing on Defendants' motion to dismiss Leaf's First Amended Complaint. The Court ruled from the bench and granted Defendants' motion to dismiss with Prejudice.
Martin Leaf ("Leaf") moves for reconsideration of that order. [Doc. 58, PgID 2403].
Local Rule 7.1(h)(3) provides the Court's standard for review of a motion for reconsideration:
Generally, and without restricting the court's discretion, the court will not grant motions for . . . reconsideration that merely present the same issues ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication. The movant must not only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the court and the parties and other persons entitled to be heard on the motion have been misled but also show that correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.
E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(h)(3). Palpable defects are those which are "obvious, clear, unmistakable, manifest or plain." Mich. Dep't of Treasury v. Michalec, 181 F.Supp.2d 731, 734 (E.D. Mich. 2002). "It is an exception to the norm for the Court to grant a motion for reconsideration." Maiberger v. City of Livonia, 724 F.Supp.2d 759, 780 (E.D. Mich. 2010). "[A]bsent a significant error that changes the outcome of a ruling on a motion, the Court will not provide a party with an opportunity to relitigate issues already decided." Id.
In his motion, Leaf rehashes the same arguments made in his motion papers and during the hearing.
Leaf fails to demonstrate a palpable defect, or any error made by the Court, which should change its ruling.
Leaf's motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
IT IS ORDERED.
