Berrios, Edgar v. Hovic
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 EDGAR BERRIOS, RAYMOND ALLYNE, 5 MALCOLM MACCOW, and VIRGINIE GEORGE, 5 5 Plaintiffs, 5 2005-CV-0192 v. 5 5 HOVIC; HOVENSA, LLC; JOHN PAULUS; DARYL 5 KRAMER, TODD REIDLINGER, JACOBS 5 INDUSTRIAL MAINTENANCE COMPANY, LLC; 5 WYATT V.I., INC.; JACOBS CONSTRUCTORS, 5 INC.; JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC; and 5 WYATT FIELD SERVICE COMPANY, 5 Defendants. 5 ________________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Linda J. Blair, Esq. Stephanie L. Adler, Esq. Charles E. Engeman, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO RECONSIDER THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider Order of August 7, 2008 (Docket No. 232). Defendant HOVENSA, L.L.C., filed an opposition to said motion, and Plaintiffs filed a reply thereto. Pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7.3, parties may seek reconsideration of an order issued of the Court based upon “1. intervening change in controlling law; 2. availability of new evidence, or; 3. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-1_05-cv-00192/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-1_05-cv-00192-0.pdf
SHA-256 a9236791fccffefbe255a480aaa44acfa4160c0b73a2a390f0155433cabe200d
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-a9236791fccf
Document text
DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 5 EDGAR BERRIOS, RAYMOND ALLYNE, 5 MALCOLM MACCOW, and VIRGINIE GEORGE, 5 5 Plaintiffs, 5 2005-CV-0192 v. 5 5 HOVIC; HOVENSA, LLC; JOHN PAULUS; DARYL 5 KRAMER, TODD REIDLINGER, JACOBS 5 INDUSTRIAL MAINTENANCE COMPANY, LLC; 5 WYATT V.I., INC.; JACOBS CONSTRUCTORS, 5 INC.; JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP, LLC; and 5 WYATT FIELD SERVICE COMPANY, 5 Defendants. 5 ________________________________________________5 TO: Lee J. Rohn, Esq. Linda J. Blair, Esq. Stephanie L. Adler, Esq. Charles E. Engeman, Esq. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO RECONSIDER THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider Order of August 7, 2008 (Docket No. 232). Defendant HOVENSA, L.L.C., filed an opposition to said motion, and Plaintiffs filed a reply thereto. Pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7.3, parties may seek reconsideration of an order issued of the Court based upon “1. intervening change in controlling law; 2. availability of new evidence, or; 3. the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest Case: 1:05-cv-00192-JEJ-GWC Document #: 235 Filed: 09/09/08 Page 1 of 2 Berrios v. HOVIC 2005-CV-0192 Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider injustice.” LRCi 7.3. Nowhere in Plaintiffs’ motion do Plaintiffs demonstrate that reconsideration is warranted upon any of those enumerated grounds. Plaintiffs refer to the order at issue as “unrealistic and unworkable,” motion at 1, despite the fact that, as Defendants note, the deadline in dispute was the one requested by counsel for Plaintiffs. The motion is otherwise silent regarding any change in law, new evidence, or error. It appears that Plaintiffs merely are dissatisfied with the order and counsel’s participation in the status conference during which the deadline was discussed. However, it is well established that “[d]issatisfaction with the Court's ruling is not a proper basis for reconsideration.” Central Reserve Life Ins. Co. v. Marello, No. Civ. A. 00-3344, 2001 WL 41129 at *2 (E.D. Pa. January 17, 2001) (citing Burger King Corp. v. New England Hood and Duct Cleaning Co., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1022 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 4, 2000)). Accordingly, it is now hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider Order of August 7, 2008 (Docket No. 232) is DENIED. ENTER: Dated: September 9, 2008 /s/ GEORGE W. CANNON, JR. U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case: 1:05-cv-00192-JEJ-GWC Document #: 235 Filed: 09/09/08 Page 2 of 2