Opinion
CAUSE NO. 3:05-CV-804 RM.
February 27, 2008
OPINION AND ORDER
The defendants, by counsel, filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(c). They argue that monetary damages are not available against individual defendants in an action pursuant to the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc (RLUIPA). This is not the first time that they have raised this argument with the court. This same argument was presented in their motion for summary judgment and it was rejected. Though they now cite additional case law for their position, this motion is, nevertheless, merely a motion to reconsider the summary judgment motion based on subsequent non-binding authority. Though the defendants argue that the Seventh Circuit would be highly persuaded by Smith v. Allen, 502 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2007), such an result is not so self evident as to warrant reconsideration in this case.
Particularly in evolving areas of the law such as this one, new cases (which add weight to one side or the other of an ongoing debate) are handed down regularly. Though changes in binding authority require reconsideration of prior rulings in a ongoing case, it would result in unnecessarily protracted litigation and judicial inefficiency if courts regularly reconsidered prior rulings based merely on new, potentially persuasive case law. This is simply not the proper time in this litigation to present this argument. If the defendants lose at trial, this argument can then be properly presented on appeal.
For the foregoing reasons, the court DENIES the motion for judgment on the pleadings (docket # 124) and REAFFIRMS the trial deadlines set in this court's order of February 6, 2008.
SO ORDERED.