Legal Opinion
United States Government ex rel. Houck v. Folding Carton Administration Committee
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided June 2, 1988No. 87 C 1253PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
NORGLE, District Judge.
Before the court is defendants’, Folding Carton Administration Committee, James Sloan, Perry Goldberg, Alexander Domanskis, and Thomas Boodel, motion for reconsideration of that portion of the courts’ order dated January 20, 1988 (“Order”), denying their request for Rule 11 sanctions. Motions to reconsider are ordinarily granted only to correct clear errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence which could not have been adduced during the pendency of the motion. Publisher’s Resource v. Walker-Davis Publication, 762 F.2d 557, 561 (7th Cir. 1985).…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Mullis v. United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of NevadaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Forrester v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Richard L. Zaldivar v. City of Los Angeles, and Margaret Salazar, Intervenors-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Szabo Food Service, Inc. v. Canteen CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- White v. MurthaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- United States v. Duke Energy Corp.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2003
- Federal Trade Commission v. Mylan Laboratories, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 1999
- Comeau v. RuppDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1991
- Fidelity State Bank, Garden City, Kan. v. OlesDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1991
- Kidwell v. Board of County Com'rs of Shawnee CountyDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1998
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.