Wean v. Masters

M.D. Florida

Wean v. Masters

DecidedApril 24, 2025

Docket2:23-cv-00302

StatusUnknown

This text of Wean v. Masters (Wean v. Masters) 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.

Bluebook

Wean v. Masters, (M.D. Fla. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

RICHARD WEAN,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 2:23-cv-302-SPC-NPM

MELINDA MASTERS, YEN LE JON P. CARNER, and JARAD ANDERSON,

Defendants. / OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are three “Motion[s] of Clarification” filed by Plaintiff Richard Wean (Docs. 83, 84, and 85). The motions relate to three motions for injunctive relief the Court denied on March 28, 2025. (See Doc. 78). The Court construes the motions for clarification as requests for reconsideration because they ask the Court to grant the motions it denied in the prior order. 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). Wean presents extraordinary circumstances to warrant reconsideration of the Court’s prior order. Rather, he seeks to relitigate issues the Court already decided. Accordingly, Wean’s construes motions for reconsideration (Docs. 83, 84, and 85) are DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on April 24, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SA: FTMP-1

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

RICHARD WEAN,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 2:23-cv-302-SPC-NPM

MELINDA MASTERS, YEN LE JON P. CARNER, and JARAD ANDERSON,

Defendants. / OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are three “Motion[s] of Clarification” filed by Plaintiff Richard Wean (Docs. 83, 84, and 85). The motions relate to three motions for injunctive relief the Court denied on March 28, 2025. (See Doc. 78). The Court construes the motions for clarification as requests for reconsideration because they ask the Court to grant the motions it denied in the prior order. 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). Wean presents extraordinary circumstances to warrant reconsideration of the Court’s prior order. Rather, he seeks to relitigate issues the Court already decided. Accordingly, Wean’s construes motions for reconsideration (Docs. 83, 84, and 85) are DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on April 24, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SA: FTMP-1

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Wean v. Masters, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wean-v-masters-flmd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack