Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Aaron Stribling v. Bortolemedi

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 17, 2013

AARON STRIBLING, PLAINTIFF,
v.
BORTOLEMEDI, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

On April 11, 2013, plaintiff filed a motion asking that this court reconsider its April 1, 2013 order denying plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel. A court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). "Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law." Id. at 1263. The court has reviewed plaintiff's motion for reconsideration and finds that nothing warrants reconsideration of the court's decision to deny plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's April 11, 2013 motion for reconsideration (Dkt. No. 75) is denied.

20130417

© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.