Sheets v. Gorman
This text of Sheets v. Gorman (Sheets v. Gorman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
ANDREW SHEETS,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 2:25-cv-583-SPC-KCD
WILLIAM GORMAN and CITY OF PUNTA GORDA,
Defendants. /
OPINION AND ORDER The Court dismissed pro se Plaintiff Andrew Sheets’ complaint without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or move to proceed without prepayment of costs. (Doc. 3). Plaintiff now moves the Court to reconsider its dismissal and reinstate his case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). (Doc. 5). Reconsideration of a prior order is an extraordinary measure that should be applied sparingly. Adams v. Beoneman, 335 F.R.D. 452, 454 (M.D. Fla. 2020). Court orders are not intended as first drafts subject to revisions at a litigant’s pleasure, so a movant must establish extraordinary circumstances supporting reconsideration. Gold Cross EMS, Inc. v. Children’s Hosp. of Ala., 108 F. Supp. 3d 1376, 1384 (S.D. Ga. 2015). “A motion for reconsideration should raise new issues, not merely readdress issues previously litigated.” PaineWebber Income Props. v. Mobil Oil Corp., 902 F. Supp. 1514, 1521 (M.D. Fla. 1995). Plaintiff presents no extraordinary circumstances warranting reconsideration. He claims the dismissal is premature and procedurally inconsistent because in other cases, he consistently waits to pay the filing fee
or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis until “docket initiation and judicial assignment.” That he has been permitted to break the rules in other
cases is of no consequence. Further, he describes the dismissal as a “manifest injustice” because the Court applied “procedural technicalities.” But at the end of the day, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's case for failure to pay the filing fee
or move to proceed in forma pauperis—a problem of Plaintiff's own making. And in its prior Order, the Court advised Plaintiff that if he wants to proceed with his claims, he may file another complaint under a separate case number. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 5) is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on July 14, 2025.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Sheets v. Gorman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheets-v-gorman-flmd-2025.