Opinion
C.A. No.: 9:14-cv-1877-PMD
02-22-2017
Del Webb Communities, Inc. and PulteGroup, Inc., Plaintiffs/Petitioners, v. Roger F. Carlson and Mary Jo Carlson, Defendants/Respondents.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants/Respondents Roger F. Carlson and Mary Jo Carlson's motion to reconsider the Court's February 1 order (ECF No. 115). For the reasons set forth herein, the Carlsons' motion is denied.
DISCUSSION
The Carlsons' motion to reconsider pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure recites the same arguments set forth in the Carlsons' original briefs. The Carlsons have not shown an intervening change in the controlling law, new evidence that was not available at the time of the Court's order, or that there has been a clear error of law or a manifest injustice. See Robinson v. Wix Filtration Corp., LLC, 599 F.3d 403, 407 (4th Cir. 2010). As a result, the Carlsons' motion to reconsider must be denied. See Hartsock v. Goodyear Dunlop Tires N. Am. Ltd., No. 2:13-cv-419-PMD, 2014 WL 11022098, at *1 (D.S.C. June 16, 2014) ("A motion for reconsideration . . . 'is not an opportunity to rehash issues already ruled upon because a litigant is displeased with the result.'" (quoting Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Double Down Entm't, LLC, No. 0:11-cv-2438-MBS, 2012 WL 6210344, at *2 (D.S.C. Dec. 13, 2012))).
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED that the Carlsons' motion to reconsider is DENIED.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
PATRICK MICHAEL DUFFY
United States District Judge February 22, 2017
Charleston, South Carolina