Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 59(E)

651 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 78 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• PainTEQ, LLC v. Omnia Med., LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-13
  The court denied PainTEQ's motion for reconsideration, finding its arguments either procedurally improper or without merit under the applicable legal standards.
• Avant v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Desoto County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-11-13
  The court denied the motion for reconsideration because the petitioner failed to establish extraordinary circumstances and did not address the dispositive issue of whether his state motion was pending.
• Cedant v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-10-29
  The court denied the government's motion to alter or amend the judgment, finding that the evidence supported the awarded damages and the expert testimony was reliable.
• Myers v. City of Naples
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-24
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion to alter or amend the judgment, finding no grounds for reconsideration.
• Gaston v. City of Leesburg
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-15
  The Court denied the Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration because the grounds presented were not sufficient to justify revisiting the prior order.
• Bensouna v. E11Even Miami, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-10-09
  The court granted the motion for reconsideration, finding that newly discovered evidence of coordination between the defendant and law enforcement could establish state action for a federal claim.
• Paulino v. Westlake Servs., LLC.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-09-25
  The court held that it erred in granting dismissal before the plaintiff's response deadline, but the dismissal of counterclaims is granted with a condition that costs may be assessed if refiled.
• Walker v. Bailey
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-25
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present valid grounds for reconsideration of the prior order dismissing certain claims.
• Patt v. Volkswagen Grp. of Am., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-09-23 ·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 59(E) (Motion To Alter Or Amend Judgment)
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion to alter or amend the judgment, finding no manifest error of law or fact in its prior grant of summary judgment for the defendants.
• Russoniello v. Ingram
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-19
  The court held that the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration was denied because it failed to meet the rigorous standard required for such a motion.
• Bowman v. Hunter
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-05
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration because it failed to present newly discovered evidence or demonstrate manifest errors of law or fact.
• Doss v. Holder
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-27
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to meet the standard for reconsideration of prior orders, as the motion was conclusory, lacked legal basis, and did not demonstrate manifest error, new evidence, or injustice.
• Johnson v. Jones
  2023 WL 4358555· M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-23
  The court denied the plaintiff's motions for reconsideration because the arguments presented were either not grounds for reconsideration or did not establish extraordinary circumstances required for equitable tolling.
• De Ford v. Koutoulas
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-12
  The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration because they failed to properly oppose the original motion to compel depositions and did not present sufficient grounds for reconsideration.
• Stengl v. L3Harris Techs., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-06
  A motion for reconsideration is denied when the movant fails to present new evidence, manifest errors of law or fact, or extraordinary circumstances, and instead attempts to relitigate settled matters or collaterally attack a prior order.
• Silva v. Warden, FCC Coleman - Low
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-31
  The court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration because the cited Supreme Court decision did not constitute an intervening change in controlling law that would alter the prior judgment.
• Rodriguez v. Clear Blue Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-24
  The court held that a motion for reconsideration cannot be used to raise arguments or present evidence that could have been raised earlier, and that the defendant waived its affirmative defense by failing to plead it in a timely manner.
• Aloba v. Warden, FCC Coleman 1
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-22
  The court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration because he failed to provide grounds warranting such relief.
• Henderson v. Gualtieri
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-07-11 ·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 59(E) (Motion To Alter Or Amend Judgment)
  Henderson, a state prisoner, sought federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging a state speedy trial violation. The district court dismissed the petition as premature for lack of exhaustion of state remedies and because § 2241 is limited to federal constitutio
• MedEnvios Healthcare, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-07-01 ·via Rule 59(E) Motion
  The court denied the defendant's motion for reconsideration because it failed to demonstrate a valid basis for reconsideration under Rule 59(e) or Rule 60(b), and did not present new facts or law to disturb the prior ruling.
• U.S. Bank v. Taveras
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-06-18
  The court denied defendants' motion to set aside a prior order granting remand and sanctions, finding no basis for reconsideration.
• Erenler v. TJM Columbus, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-05-03
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a new trial or relief from judgment, finding that all arguments were previously asserted and resolved at trial.
• Jean-Philippe v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-05-01
  The court held that a motion for reconsideration of a denied habeas petition, which reasserts claims of innocence or attacks the merits of the prior decision, is a successive habeas petition requiring appellate authorization and thus dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. However, a
• Nat'l Tr. Ins. Co. v. Savoy Hotel P'rs, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-30
  The court held that the defendant failed to show good cause for an untimely amendment and did not establish grounds for reconsideration of the prior dismissal order.
• Lanier v. City of Miami
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-17
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration and request for leave to file a second amended complaint.
• Jiangmen Benlida Printed Cir. Co., Ltd. v. Circuitronix, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-16
  The court held that a motion to amend a judgment to include prejudgment and post-judgment interest was timely because a prior Rule 50(b) motion suspended the finality of the judgment, and prejudgment interest is a matter of law under Florida statutes when damages are liquidated.
• Gorbey v. Davis
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-04-15
  The Court denied the Plaintiff's motion to reconsider its prior order denying leave to appeal in forma pauperis.
• Bald Guy C-Store, Inc. v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-04-04
  The court held that the parties' joint motion for reconsideration of the order striking the motion for summary judgment must be denied.
• Santiago v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-29
  The court held that a motion for reconsideration under Rule 59(e) cannot be used to relitigate old matters, raise new arguments, or present evidence that could have been raised prior to judgment.
• Jarvis v. City of Daytona Beach
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-23
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration because the plaintiff failed to comply with the Case Management and Scheduling Order regarding the stipulation of agreed facts.
• Golden v. Dixon
  N.D. Fla.· 2024-02-19
  The court held that a motion filed after judgment was entered would be construed as a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment, which was denied.
• Perez-Quevedo v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-07
  The court held that a motion for reconsideration of a denial of a § 2255 motion was unwarranted as the movant failed to show a miscarriage of justice and his claim was procedurally barred. The court also held that a § 2241 petition was not the proper avenue for challenging the va
• Page v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-05
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate manifest errors of law or fact to justify reconsideration of the order denying attorney's fees under the EAJA.
• Guisao v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-30
  The court held that the petitioner's motion for relief under Rule 60(b) was untimely and that the submitted evidence did not demonstrate actual innocence.
• Wiand v. Adamek
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-23
  The Court denies the defendants' motion for reconsideration because they have not established grounds for relief under Rule 59(e).
• Harris v. Wiggins
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-23
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration because the plaintiff failed to articulate any basis for the court to reverse its prior decision, such as manifest errors of law or fact.
• Garcia v. Stillman
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-01-12
  The court granted plaintiffs' motion for an indicative ruling, stating it would clarify its prior summary judgment order to explicitly confirm that the In-Office Restrictions violated the First Amendment's overbreadth doctrine.
• Reed v. Chamblee
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-01-05
  The court denied plaintiff's motions for recusal and reconsideration, and granted defendants' motion for attorney fees and costs under Florida's anti-SLAPP statute.
• Stinson v. Williams
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-12-28
  The court held that a motion for reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy not to be used for rearguing decided issues or presenting new arguments improperly.
• Howard v. Gucci Am., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-12-11
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration because she failed to demonstrate clear error or manifest injustice, and her arguments amounted to mere disagreement with the prior dismissal order.
• Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp. v. Venequip Mach. Sales Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-11-29
  The court held that a party seeking to amend a complaint after a dismissal order and judgment must meet the standards of Rules 59(e) or 60(b), and that the plaintiff failed to show good cause for untimely amendment under Rule 16(b) or demonstrate diligence.
• Saito v. Moffett
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-11-08
  The court denied the plaintiff's objections and demands for reconsideration because they failed to meet the high standards required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59(e) and 60(b).
• Saito v. Lewis
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-11-08
  The court denied the plaintiffs' objections and demand for reconsideration because they failed to meet the demanding standards of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59(e) and 60(b).
• Thelen v. Somatics, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-11-07 ·via Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 59(E) (Motion To Alter Or Amend Judgment)
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a new trial or to alter the judgment, finding no prejudicial errors in jury instructions or evidentiary rulings, and affirmed the prior grant of summary judgment on the design defect claim.
• Handlon v.Google, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-11-06
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion to reconsider its prior order of dismissal.
• Lebed v. United States Postal Inspector Serv.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-10-30
  The court held that the plaintiff's motions to alter or amend the judgment under Rule 59(e) were denied because he failed to present newly discovered evidence or manifest errors of law or fact.
• Graziano v. Eagle Creek of Naples Condo. Assoc., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-10-10
  A motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle to raise arguments that could have been presented earlier, and discovery orders are not final orders subject to Rule 60(b) relief.
• Myers v. U.S. Bank N.A.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-10-03
  The court denied the appellant's motion for reconsideration because it failed to present newly discovered evidence or demonstrate a manifest error of law or fact.
• Knight v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-09-22
  The court denied the Petitioner's motion to alter or amend the judgment and his request for a certificate of appealability.
• T.T. Int'l Co., Ltd v. BMP Int'l, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-21
  The court denied the defendants' motion to vacate, alter, or amend the judgment, finding no newly discovered evidence or manifest error of law or fact.