Bellino v. Tallarico
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:24-cv-00712
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Bellino v. Tallarico, Judge Kaplan denied Bellino’s reconsideration motion because it raised an argument not made earlier.
Jeanne Bellino’s reconsideration motion was denied; the court stated that she could still timely seek permission to amend her complaint. Steven Victor Tallarico’s earlier unopposed motion to dismiss had been granted.
What happened
In Bellino v. Tallarico, Jeanne Bellino asked the court to reconsider its earlier order granting Steven Victor Tallarico’s unopposed motion to dismiss. The opinion does not state the grounds for that earlier dismissal.
The court explained that reconsideration generally requires showing that the court overlooked controlling decisions or important information. It also said reconsideration is not a way to seek a different result based on an argument that was not previously made.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan denied the motion for reconsideration. The court said Bellino could still timely ask for permission to amend her complaint.
The detailed version
- Bellino v. Tallarico · No. 1:24-cv-00712
- Lewis Kaplan
- Mar. 7, 2024
Background
Jeanne Bellino moved for reconsideration of the court’s earlier order granting defendant Steven Victor Tallarico’s unopposed motion to dismiss. The opinion identifies Tallarico as also known as Steven Tyler. It does not describe the claims or explain the grounds for the original dismissal.
Standard for Reconsideration
The court stated that reconsideration generally will be denied unless the moving party identifies controlling decisions or information that the court overlooked. The court also explained that reconsideration is not intended to obtain a different outcome based on an argument that was not made in the original proceeding.
Ruling
The court concluded that Bellino’s supporting memorandum attempted to do exactly that. It therefore denied the motion for reconsideration. The court stated that Bellino remained free to file a timely motion for leave to amend the complaint.
Effect
The order denies only the motion for reconsideration. Based on the opinion text, the earlier order granting the unopposed motion to dismiss remains in place, while Bellino may still seek permission to amend if she does so timely.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.