Because Claimant seeks reconsideration of the allowance of the Claim, section 502(j) of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rule 3008 and Local Bankruptcy Rule 3008-1 govern the Motion. See In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472(SMB), 2008 WL 2705472, at *2 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008). Under section 502(j) of the Bankruptcy Code, "[a] claim that has been allowed or disallowed may be reconsidered for cause."
Because Claimant seeks reconsideration of the allowance of the Claim, section 502(j) of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rule 3008 and Local Bankruptcy Rule 3008-1 govern the Motion. See In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472(SMB), 2008 WL 2705472, at *2 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008). Under section 502(j) of the Bankruptcy Code, "[a] claim that has been allowed or disallowed may be reconsidered for cause."
"The rule permitting reargument is strictly construed to avoid repetitive arguments on issues the court has already fully considered." In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472, 2008 WL 2705472, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008) (citing Griffin Indus., Inc. v. Petrojam, Ltd., 72 F. Supp. 2d 365, 368 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); accord Adams v. United States, 686 F. Supp. 417, 418 (S.D.N.Y. 1988); cf. In re Lamberti, No. 06-35218, 2006 WL 2583303, at *2 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Aug. 16, 2006) ("Motions for reconsideration are disfavored, because complete disposition of discrete issues and claims is often essential to effective case management.") (internal quotations and citations omitted).
"[T]he movant must show that the court overlooked controlling decisions or factual matters 'that might materially have influenced its earlier decision.'" In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472 (SMB), 2008 WL 2705472, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008) (quoting Anglo Am. Ins. Grp., P.L.C. v. CalFed Inc., 940 F. Supp. 554, 557 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)); accord Banco de Seguros del Estado v. Mut. Marine Offices, Inc., 230 F. Supp. 2d 427, 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2002), aff'd, 344 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2003); Griffin Indus., Inc. v. Petrojam, Ltd., 72 F. Supp. 2d 365, 368 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F. Supp. 830, 832-33 (S.D.N.Y. 1992), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992). "Alternatively, the movant must demonstrate the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice."
"The movant must show that the court overlooked controlling decisions or factual matters 'that might materially have influenced its earlier decision.'" In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472 (SMB), 2008 WL 2705472, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008) (quoting Anglo American Ins. Group, P.L.C. v. CalFed Inc., 940 F. Supp. 554, 557 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)). "Alternatively, the movant must demonstrate the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice."
The movant must show that the court overlooked controlling decisions or factual matters "that might materially have influenced its earlier decision." In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472 (SMB), 2008 WL 2705472, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008)(quoting Anglo Am. Ins. Group., P.L.C. v. CalFed Inc., 940 F. Supp. 554, 557 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)); accord Banco de Seguros del Estado v. Mut. Marine Offices, Inc., 230 F. Supp. 2d 427, 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2002), aff'd, 344 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2003); Griffin Indus., Inc. v. Petrojam, Ltd., 72 F. Supp. 2d 365, 368 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F. Supp. 830, 832-33 (S.D.N.Y. 1992), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992). "Alternatively, the movant must demonstrate the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice."
The movant must show that the court overlooked controlling decisions or factual matters "that might materially have influenced its earlier decision." In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472, 2008 WL 2705472, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008) (citation omitted); Anglo Am. Ins. Grp.,P.L.C. v. CalFed Inc., 940 F. Supp. 554, 557 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (quoting Morser v. AT T Info. Sys., 715 F. Supp. 516, 517 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)); accord Banco de Seguros del Estado v. Mut. Marine Offices, Inc., 230 F. Supp. 2d 427, 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2002),aff'd, 344 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2003); Griffin Indus., Inc. v. Petrojam, Ltd., 72 F. Supp. 2d 365, 368 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F. Supp. 830, 832-33 (S.D.N.Y. 1992), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992). Alternatively, "the movant must demonstrate the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice."
The movant must show that the court overlooked controlling decisions or factual matters "that might materially have influenced its earlier decision." In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472, 2008 WL 2705472, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008) (citation omitted); Anglo Am. Ins. Grp., Local Bankruptcy Rule 9023-1(a) states:
The movant must show that the court overlooked controlling decisions or factual matters "that might materially have influenced its earlier decision." In re Best Payphones, Inc., No. 01-15472, 2008 WL 2705472, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2008);Anglo American Ins. Group, P.L.C. v. CalFed Inc., 940 F. Supp. 554, 557 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (quoting Morser v. AT T Info. Sys., 715 F. Supp. 516, 517 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)); accord Banco de Seguros del Estado v. Mut. Marine Offices, Inc., 230 F. Supp. 2d 427, 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2002), aff'd, 344 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2003); Griffin Indus., Inc. v. Petrojam, Ltd., 72 F. Supp. 2d 365, 368 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F. Supp. 830, 832-33 (S.D.N.Y.),aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992). Alternatively, "the movant must demonstrate the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice."
S.D.N.Y. 2004) (Bernstein, C.J.) (internal quotations omitted).In re Best Payphones, Inc., 2008 WL 2705472 at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jul. 3, 2008) (Bernstein, C.J.).See In re Adelphia Business Solutions, Inc., 2002 WL 31557665 at * 1 n. 1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 15, 2002) (Gerber, J.). For this reason, the Court agrees with the objectors that BNY's submission of a declaration on this motion was inappropriate.