Those circumstances include mistake, excusable neglect, newly discovered evidence, fraud by an opposing party, and “any other reason that justifies relief.” That catch-all is not as broad as it sounds, however. Rule 60(b) allows for “relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding” in certain circumstances. Still, reconsideration of a judgment is considered an extraordinary remedy which will be granted only sparingly. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not expressly allow motions for reconsideration, but district courts generally treat them as being filed under Rule 59 or 60. The permissible grounds for seeking reconsideration depend on whether you’re in federal court or state court. Do you file a follow-up motion asking the court to change its mind? Or do you file it away in the “ grounds for appeal” category? Motions for reconsideration are disfavored in every jurisdiction and you’ve already lost once–so the odds are against you–but if the court made a clear mistake of law, it can make sense to inform the court of the mistake.
“The court got it wrong,” you tell yourself, perhaps even sincerely. Id.Suppose you lose a motion you thought you would almost certainly win. The court also has discretion to limit its reconsideration to the issue it believes warrants further consideration. “‘ehearing will not be ordered on the ground merely that a change of members of the bench has either taken place, or is about to occur.’” Hoffman v Barrett, 493 Mich 964, 964 (2013), quoting Peoples v Evening News Ass’n, 51 Mich 11, 21 (1883).Ī court’s decision to grant or deny a motion for reconsideration is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.
No abuse of discretion was found where the trial court denied a plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration that rested “on a legal theory and facts which could have been pled or argued prior to the trial court’s original order” because the motion did not “demonstrate a ‘palpable error by which the court and the parties ha been misled.’” Charbeneau v Wayne Co Gen Hosp, 158 Mich App 730, 733 (1987), quoting MCR 2.119(F)(3).
Accordingly, MCR 2.119(F)(3) “does not categorically prevent a trial court from revisiting an issue even when the motion for reconsideration presents the same issue already ruled upon in fact, it allows considerable discretion to correct mistakes.” Macomb Co Dep’t of Human Servs v Anderson, 304 Mich App 750, 754 (2014). However, the decision whether to grant a motion for reconsideration is within the court’s discretion. Generally, a motion for rehearing or reconsideration that merely presents the same issue ruled on by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, will not be granted. The time requirement for filing a motion for reconsideration or rehearing insures that the motion will be brought expeditiously.” Bers v Bers, 161 Mich App 457, 462 (1987) (at the time this case was decided, the time requirement was seven days) (citation omitted). “The purpose of MCR 2.119(F) is to allow a trial court to immediately correct any obvious mistakes it may have made in ruling on a motion, which would otherwise be subject to correction on appeal, but at a much greater expense to the parties. “The moving party must demonstrate a palpable error by which the court and the parties have been misled and show that a different disposition of the motion must result from correction of the error.” MCR 2.119(F)(3).Ī motion for reconsideration or rehearing tolls the period of time in which a party may file a request for case-evaluation sanctions. Responses and oral arguments are not permitted unless ordered by the court. Unless a more specific court rule provides otherwise, 1 a motion for reconsideration or rehearing must be filed and served no later than 21 days after entry of order disposing of the motion.