Raymond A. Hanna El v. State of Florida, et al., No. 18-12847 (11th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on June 14, 2019.
Download PDF
Case: 18-12645 Date Filed: 06/18/2019 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-12645 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 0:17-cv-60597-WPD RAYMOND A. HANNA EL, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus STATE OF FLORIDA, BROWARD COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES, CITY OF LAUDERHILL, CARLOS REBELLO, MICHAEL MAUER, et al., Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (June 18, 2019) Case: 18-12645 Date Filed: 06/18/2019 Page: 2 of 2 Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, BRANCH, and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Raymond Hanna El, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 suit, appeals the district court’s denial of his “Writ to Amend the Record,” which the district court construed as a motion to amend. We review only for an abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of a motion to amend. Stevens v. Gay, 864 F.2d 113, 116 (11th Cir. 1989). The district court denied Hanna El’s motion to amend because the case was closed — and had been for over a year by the time Hanna El filed his motion. That was not an abuse of discretion. See id. (“Undue delay or failure properly to amend a complaint after repeated opportunity to do so . . . constitutes grounds to deny a motion to amend.”). Hanna El also appeals the denial of his “Writ of Error,” which the district court construed as a motion for reconsideration. We review only for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion for reconsideration. Richardson v. Johnson, 598 F.3d 734, 740 (11th Cir. 2010) (per curiam). Hanna El’s motion appears to have been an effort to relitigate the district court’s prior rulings. Because “[a] motion for reconsideration cannot be used to relitigate old matters,” id. (quotation marks omitted), the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Hanna El’s motion. AFFIRMED. 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.
