Legal Opinion

Woodrum v. Thomas Memorial Hospital Foundation, Inc.

District Court, N.D. West Virginia

Decided May 21, 1999No. Civ.A. No. 2:98-0520PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

HADEN, Chief Judge.

Pending is Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration, alteration or amendment of judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion is ripe for disposition. For reasons discussed more fully below, the Court DENIES the motion.

The Court declines to restate the facts, which are fully set out in the opinion of which Plaintiff seeks amendment, Woodrum v. Thomas Memorial Hospital Foundation, Inc., 45 F.Supp.2d 538 (S.D.W.Va.1999).

Rule 59(e) allows an aggrieved party to file a motion to alter or amend a judgment within ten…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hutchinson v. StatonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1993
  2. Servants of the Paraclete, Inc. v. Great American InsuranceDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 1994
  3. Woodrum v. Thomas Memorial Hospital Foundation Inc.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1999

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. Albert C. Burgess, Jr. v. United States of America, et al.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2026
  2. Anderson v. ReepDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2024
  3. Baraya v. Ospina BarayaDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2022
  4. Blevins v. MaynorDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2024
  5. Boger v. CrosswhiteDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2021

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API