Wells v. Miller
- Lewis Liman
- 1:21-cv-11231
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Wells v. Miller, Judge Liman denied Wells’s motion to strike and motion for reconsideration.
Carl D. Wells’s motion to strike and motion for reconsideration were denied; the opinion states that his petition had previously been dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
In Wells v. Miller, Carl D. Wells asked the court to strike a letter submitted by David Bernstein and to reconsider its earlier dismissal of Wells’s petition without prejudice.
The court denied both motions. It ruled that the motion to strike could not be used against the letter because the letter was not a pleading covered by the rule Wells cited. It also found that Wells had not identified overlooked controlling decisions or information that would justify reconsideration.
Judge Lewis J. Liman issued the order on April 19, 2023, denying the motion to strike and the motion for reconsideration.
The detailed version
- Wells v. Miller · No. 1:21-cv-11231
- Lewis Liman
- Apr. 19, 2023
Background
Carl D. Wells submitted a letter that the court interpreted as two motions: a motion to strike David Bernstein’s letter, identified as Dkt. No. 79-1, and a motion asking the court to reconsider its March 27, 2023 opinion and order dismissing Wells’s petition without prejudice.
Motion to Strike
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) allows a court to remove redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous material from pleadings. The court explained that pleadings include complaints, crossclaims, counterclaims, answers, and replies to answers. Because Wells’s motion targeted a letter rather than a pleading, the court denied the motion to strike.
Motion for Reconsideration
The court explained that reconsideration is allowed only in limited circumstances, such as a change in controlling law, newly available evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent serious unfairness. The court also stated that reconsideration generally requires the moving party to identify controlling decisions or information that the court overlooked and that could reasonably change its conclusion. Because Wells had not identified any such decisions or information, the court denied his motion for reconsideration.
Ruling
The court denied both motions. The order was signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.