Ellis et al v. Lemons et al, No. 2:2015cv00212 - Document 59 (D. Utah 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION and Order denying 54 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 1/27/16. (jlw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Ellis et al v. Lemons et al Doc. 59 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH PHILLIP C. ELLIS AND HEIDI B. ELLIS, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Plaintiffs, v. RICHARD LEMONS, M.D., CHELSEA, GRIFFIN, AND EMILY HELM, Case No. 2:15-CV-212 TS Defendant. District Judge Ted Stewart This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Phillip and Heidi Ellis’s Motion for Reconsideration of its prior Memorandum Decision and Order, dated November 19, 2015 (Docket No. 49). For the reasons discussed below, the Court will deny Plaintiffs’ Motion. “Grounds warranting a motion to reconsider include (1) an intervening change in the controlling law, (2) new evidence previously unavailable, and (3) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice.” 1 “Thus, a motion for reconsideration is appropriate where the court has misapprehended the facts, a party’s position, or the controlling law. It is not appropriate to revisit issues already addressed or advance arguments that could have been raised in prior briefing.” 2 The Court finds that the Plaintiffs have not met this burden. Plaintiffs have not introduced any intervening change in controlling law, have not pointed to new evidence previously unavailable, and have not shown a clear and manifest injustice in the Court’s prior Order. 1 Servants of Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000). 2 Id. (internal citation omitted). 1 Dockets.Justia.com It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration (Docket No. 54) is DENIED. DATED this 26th day of January, 2016. BY THE COURT: Ted Stewart United States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
