Gym Door Repairs, Inc. v. Young Equipment Sales, Inc.
- John Koeltl
- 1:15-cv-04244
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Gym Door Repairs v. Young Equipment Sales: Judge Wang denied Guardian Defendants’ reconsideration and status-conference motions concerning omitted fee exhibits.
The Guardian Defendants, whose motions for reconsideration and for a status conference were denied.
What happened
In Gym Door Repairs, Inc. v. Young Equipment Sales, Inc., the Guardian Defendants asked for more time to submit exhibits supporting fees they had omitted from filings for portions of 2015, 2016, and 2017.
The court had previously denied that request because the Guardian Defendants did not explain the software malfunction they blamed for the omissions, how it caused them, or how they would prevent future problems. The Guardian Defendants then sought reconsideration and asked the court to accept their supplemental exhibits.
Judge Ona T. Wang denied the motion for reconsideration and also denied the motion for a status conference. The order did not state that either motion was denied with or without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Gym Door Repairs, Inc. v. Young Equipment Sales, Inc. · No. 1:15-cv-04244
- John Koeltl
- Mar. 31, 2023
Background
On July 6, 2021, the Guardian Defendants moved for an extension of time to submit additional exhibits concerning fees omitted for up to four months in the fourth quarters of 2015, 2016, and 2017. They attributed the omissions to another malfunction in the PCLaw program. The Plaintiffs and the Tri-State Defendants opposed the request.
The court previously denied the extension motion on July 15, 2021. It found that the Guardian Defendants had not explained the malfunction, how it caused the alleged omissions, or how they planned to address the problem in future submissions. The court also noted that the Guardian Defendants had years and multiple opportunities to submit the information needed to support their request.
Motions and ruling
The Guardian Defendants then filed a letter motion asking the court to reconsider its denial of the request for supplemental briefing and a separate letter motion asking the court to accept their supplemental exhibits. Reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy generally available when the court overlooked controlling decisions, when controlling law has changed, or when reconsideration is needed to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice. The court found that the Guardian Defendants had shown none of those circumstances.
Judge Ona T. Wang therefore denied the Guardian Defendants’ motion for reconsideration. The court also denied the Guardian Defendants’ motion for a status conference. The order did not reach the underlying merits of the fee-submission dispute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.