Legal Opinion
Copeland v. Rosen
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 21, 2000No. 96-Civ.6308(PKL)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER
LEISURE, District Judge.
Pursuant to Local Rule 6.3, plaintiff moves by his attorney, Joan Franklin Mosley, Esq., for reconsideration of this Court’s June 15, 2000, decision to dismiss plaintiffs action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with orders of the Court. See Copeland v. Rosen, 194 F.R.D. 127 (S.D.N.Y.2000). For the reasons stated below, plaintiffs motion is denied.
*21A motion for reconsideration “will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court overlooked-matters, in other words, that might reasonably…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. ButtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Bruce C. Shrader v. Csx Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Copeland v. RosenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Davidson v. ScullyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- Copeland v. RosenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2002