Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 8, 2025

Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park LLC

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:22-cv-00775
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park, Judge Abrams denied reconsideration because Philip Columbo showed neither clear error nor new law or evidence.

Who this affects

Philip Columbo, whose motion for reconsideration was denied; the defendants, whose earlier partial dismissal ruling was not reconsidered.

What happened

In Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park LLC, Philip Columbo asked the court to reconsider an earlier decision that partly dismissed his amended complaint. The defendants’ earlier motion had been granted in part and denied in part.

Columbo argued that reconsideration was needed to correct a clear error or prevent unfairness. The court said he was relying on arguments from earlier filings and had not identified new evidence or a change in controlling law.

Judge Ronnie Abrams denied Columbo’s motion for reconsideration in its entirety and directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion. The court said reconsideration could not be used to relitigate old issues or take another opportunity to argue the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Columbo v. Philips Bryant Park LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00775
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Apr. 8, 2025

Background

The court had previously granted the defendants’ partial motion to dismiss Philip Columbo’s amended complaint in part and denied it in part. Columbo then moved for reconsideration of that decision.

Legal standard

The court explained that motions for reconsideration are governed by Local Civil Rule 6.3 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Reconsideration may be granted when the moving party shows a change in controlling law, newly available evidence, or a need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice. The court also stated that reconsideration is not a way to relitigate old issues, present new theories, obtain a rehearing on the merits, or get another opportunity to argue the case.

Court’s reasoning

Columbo argued that the court’s earlier decision contained clear error or caused manifest injustice. The court disagreed. It found that Columbo expressly relied on reasons presented in earlier pleadings and proceedings. He did not identify newly discovered evidence or a change in controlling law. The court noted that he cited only one new case, which he used for the legal standard and which was otherwise not relevant to his arguments.

Disposition

Judge Ronnie Abrams denied Columbo’s motion for reconsideration in its entirety. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motion pending at ECF No. 134.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.