The purpose of a motion to reconsider is to bring to the trial court's attention a change in the law, an error in the trial court's previous application of existing law, or newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of the prior hearing or decision. Hachem v. Chicago Title Insurance Co. , 2015 IL App (1st) 143188, ¶ 34, 399 Ill.Dec. 560, 46 N.E.3d 879 ; Emrikson v. Morfin , 2012 IL App (1st) 111687, ¶ 29, 365 Ill.Dec. 66, 977 N.E.2d 1165 ; Belluomini v. Zaryczny , 2014 IL App (1st) 122664, ¶ 20, 379 Ill.Dec. 575, 7 N.E.3d 1 ; People v. $280,020 United States Currency , 372 Ill. App. 3d 785, 791, 310 Ill.Dec. 630, 866 N.E.2d 1232 (2007).

¶ 29 It is well established that" '[t]he purpose of a motion to reconsider is to bring to the [trial] court's attention a change in the law, an error in the trial court's previous application of existing law, or newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing.'" People v. Jenkins, 2023 IL App (5th) 210085, ¶ 22 (quoting People v. $280,020 United States Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791 (2007)). In general, the circuit court's ruling on a motion to reconsider will be reviewed by this court for an abuse of discretion.

The purpose of a motion to reconsider is to bring to the court's attention a change in the law, an error in the court's application of the law, or newly discovered evidence that was not available at the previous hearing. People v. $280,020 U.S. Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791 (2007). Generally the court's decision on a motion to reconsider is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.

¶ 47 "The purpose of a motion to reconsider is to bring to the court's attention a change in the law, an error in the court's previous application of existing law, or newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing." People v. $280,020 U.S.Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791 (2007). In Liceaga v. Baez, 2019 IL App (1st) 181170, ¶ 25, the First District further explained as follows:

"The purpose of a motion to reconsider is to bring to the court's attention a change in the law, an error in the court's previous application of existing law, or newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing." People v. $280,020 U.S. Currency, 372 Ill. App. 3d 785, 791 (2007). "Where the motion to reconsider is based on new evidence, facts, or legal theories not presented in the prior proceedings, our standard of review is abuse of discretion."

¶ 20 “The Illinois General Assembly passed the Forfeiture Act to establish uniform procedures for the seizure and forfeiture of drug-related assets.” People v. $280,020 United States Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791, 310 Ill.Dec. 630, 866 N.E.2d 1232 (2007). As such, its provisions are “applicable to all property forfeitable under the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, the Cannabis Control Act, the Illinois Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or the Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act.”

¶ 19 A motion to reconsider seeks to bring to the court's attention "a change in the law, an error in the court's previous application of existing law, or newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing." People v. $280,020 United States Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791 (2007). The decision to grant or deny a motion to reconsider is within

People v. $280,020 U.S. Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791 (2007). Nevertheless, the determination of whether to impose Rule 137 sanctions is a matter within the discretion of the circuit court and should not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.

People v. $280,020 United States Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791 (2007).

¶ 21 The purpose of a motion to reconsider is to bring to the court's attention a change in the law, an error in the court's previous application of existing law, or newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing. People v. $280,020 U.S. Currency, 372 Ill.App.3d 785, 791 (1st Dist. 2007) (citing In re Gustavo H., 362 Ill.App.3d 802, 814 (1st Dist. 2005)). When a motion to reconsider is premised solely on the court's alleged misapplication of the law, the standard of review is de novo.