1. Motion for Reconsideration 2. Case Management Conference
Plaintiff Yolanda Montiel’s motion for reconsideration is denied.
A motion for reconsideration made by a party must be based on new or different facts, circumstances, or law than those before the court at the time of the original ruling. Code Civ. Proc. § 1008(a). The motion also must be accompanied by an affidavit from the moving party that states: (1) what application was previously made; (2) when and to what judge; (3) what order was made; and (4) what new or different facts, circumstances or law are claimed to be shown. Code Civ. Proc. § 1008(a). A party seeking reconsideration also must provide a satisfactory explanation for the failure to produce the evidence at an earlier time. New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 206, 213.
Plaintiff has not provided new evidence or new law. While Plaintiff says she has been too ill to present all her facts, she does not explain what that evidence is or would be
Hearing Date
November 19, 2018
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
1. Motion for Reconsideration 2. Case Management Conference
Plaintiff Yolanda Montiel’s motion for reconsideration is denied.
A motion for reconsideration made by a party must be based on new or different facts, circumstances, or law than those before the court at the time of the original ruling. Code Civ. Proc. § 1008(a). The motion also must be accompanied by an affidavit from the moving party that states: (1) what application was previously made; (2) when and to what judge; (3) what order was made; and (4) what new or different facts, circumstances or law are claimed to be shown. Code Civ. Proc. § 1008(a). A party seeking reconsideration also must provide a satisfactory explanation for the failure to produce the evidence at an earlier time. New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 206, 213.
Plaintiff has not provided new evidence or new law. While Plaintiff says she has been too ill to present all her facts, she does not explain what that evidence is or would be