Smith v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles

N.D. Alabama

Smith v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles

DecidedJuly 6, 2021

Docket4:20-cv-01250

StatusUnknown

This text of Smith v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles (Smith v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smith v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, (N.D. Ala. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION

BRADLEY JEROME SMITH, ] ] Plaintiff, ] ] v. ] 4:20-cv-01250-ACA ] ALABAMA BOARD OF PARDONS ] AND PAROLES, et al., ] ] Defendants. ]

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 14, 2020, the court dismissed this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim. (Docs. 6, 7). On July 1, 2021, Plaintiff Bradley Jerome Smith filed a letter with the court reiterating several of his allegations and adding some new factual allegations. (Doc. 8). The court construes Mr. Smith’s letter as a motion for reconsideration and DENIES the motion for the reasons explained below. “[R]econsideration of an order is an extraordinary remedy and is employed sparingly.” Rueter v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 440 F. Supp. 2d 1256, 1267–68 (N.D. Ala. 2006). Motions for reconsideration should not be a “knee- jerk reaction to an adverse ruling.” Id. (quotation marks omitted). “A motion for reconsideration cannot be used to relitigate old matters, raise argument or present evidence that could have been raised prior to the entry of judgment.” Wilchombe v. TeeVee Toons, Inc., 555 F.3d 949, 957 (11th Cir. 2009) (quotation marks omitted). Rather, reconsideration is available only “when a party presents the court with evidence of an intervening change in controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct clear error or manifest injustice.” Summit Medical Center of Alabama, Inc. v. Riley, 284 F. Supp. 2d 1350, 1355 (M.D. Ala. 2003). Mr. Smith has not met the standard for reconsideration. For the most part, Mr. Smith’s motion reiterates the same allegations that he made in his complaint and amended complaint. (See Doc. 4). The court has already considered those allegations in dismissing the amended complaint for failure to state aclaim. (See Doc. 6); Wilchombe, 555 F.3d at 957. Mr. Smith does allege some facts that happened after the dismissal of his amended complaint. (Doc. 8 at 1). Even considering the new allegations, however, Mr. Smith’s amended complaint remains deficient. Reconsideration is therefore not warranted and the court DENIES the motion. DONE and ORDERED this July 6, 2021. Lo UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION

BRADLEY JEROME SMITH, ] ] Plaintiff, ] ] v. ] 4:20-cv-01250-ACA ] ALABAMA BOARD OF PARDONS ] AND PAROLES, et al., ] ] Defendants. ]

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 14, 2020, the court dismissed this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim. (Docs. 6, 7). On July 1, 2021, Plaintiff Bradley Jerome Smith filed a letter with the court reiterating several of his allegations and adding some new factual allegations. (Doc. 8). The court construes Mr. Smith’s letter as a motion for reconsideration and DENIES the motion for the reasons explained below. “[R]econsideration of an order is an extraordinary remedy and is employed sparingly.” Rueter v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 440 F. Supp. 2d 1256, 1267–68 (N.D. Ala. 2006). Motions for reconsideration should not be a “knee- jerk reaction to an adverse ruling.” Id. (quotation marks omitted). “A motion for reconsideration cannot be used to relitigate old matters, raise argument or present evidence that could have been raised prior to the entry of judgment.” Wilchombe v. TeeVee Toons, Inc., 555 F.3d 949, 957 (11th Cir. 2009) (quotation marks omitted). Rather, reconsideration is available only “when a party presents the court with evidence of an intervening change in controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct clear error or manifest injustice.” Summit Medical Center of Alabama, Inc. v. Riley, 284 F. Supp. 2d 1350, 1355 (M.D. Ala. 2003). Mr. Smith has not met the standard for reconsideration. For the most part, Mr. Smith’s motion reiterates the same allegations that he made in his complaint and amended complaint. (See Doc. 4). The court has already considered those allegations in dismissing the amended complaint for failure to state aclaim. (See Doc. 6); Wilchombe, 555 F.3d at 957. Mr. Smith does allege some facts that happened after the dismissal of his amended complaint. (Doc. 8 at 1). Even considering the new allegations, however, Mr. Smith’s amended complaint remains deficient. Reconsideration is therefore not warranted and the court DENIES the motion. DONE and ORDERED this July 6, 2021. Lo UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Smith v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-alabama-board-of-pardons-and-paroles-alnd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack