Harold J. FARRIS, petitioner, v. Nancy J. WHALEY, et al.Case below, 330 Fed.Appx. 833. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit dismissed.

The bankruptcy court's decision to deny a motion for reconsideration is reviewed for abuse of discretion. SeeIn re Farris , 330 F. App'x 833, 835 (11th Cir. 2009) (stating that Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9024 incorporates Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) ). Most relevant here, a bankruptcy court may relieve a party from an earlier order for fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party and "for any other reason that justifies relief."

In reSmith, 541 B.R. 914, 916 & n.15 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2015) (citations omitted) (Bankruptcy Rule 9023); In re Farris, 330 F. App'x 833, 835 (11th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted) (Bankruptcy Rule 9024(b)). An abstention decision is also reviewed for abuse of discretion.

Because the dismissal of John Doe 16 from this action renders the discussion of a transfer of venue moot, the Court does not consider or adopt the magistrate judge's discussion of that issue. In adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation that Plaintiff not be declared a vexatious litigant, the Court does not view In re Farris, 330 Fed.Appx. 833, 835 (11th Cir.2009) as holding that a litigant must be pro se to be declared a vexatious litigant. Nevertheless, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge's determination that Defendant failed to carry its burden of showing that Plaintiff is acting with an improper purpose in regards to litigation of these cases.

Second, "[t]he law of the case doctrine bars relitigation of issues that were decided, either explicitly or by necessary implication, in an earlier appeal of the same case." In re Farris, 330 Fed. Appx. 833, 835 (11th Cir. 2009) (quoting United States v. Jordan, 429 F.3d 1032, 1035 (11th Cir. 2005)).