Streichert v. Town of Chester, New York

Background

The defendants moved for reargument, asking the court to reconsider its September 23, 2022 opinion and order, which had granted in part and denied in part their motion for summary judgment. Although the defendants called the filing a motion for reargument, the court construed it as a motion for reconsideration of its decision not to dismiss Ryan Wensley and Alex Jamieson.

The defendants argued that Wensley and Jamieson had no involvement in the hiring decision that remained at issue in the case. The court noted that Loretta Streichert consented to granting the motion.

Legal standard

The court explained that motions for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and Local Civil Rule 6.3 are subject to a strict standard. Reconsideration is appropriate when the court overlooked controlling law or factual matters presented on the earlier motion, or when there has been an intervening change in controlling law, new evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice. A party may not use reconsideration simply to relitigate an issue or submit material that could have been presented earlier.

Ruling

Judge Kenneth M. Karas found that the motion met this strict standard because the court had inadvertently failed to address the defendants’ earlier request to dismiss Wensley and Jamieson. To correct that error, the court granted the request and dismissed Ryan Wensley and Alex Jamieson from the case.

The court stated that the defendants’ motion was granted. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending motion. The court declined the defendants’ additional request to alter the caption to remove Wensley and Jamieson.