Arnold v. ADT Security Services, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that a trial court must consider, among other factors, the efficacy of less severe sanctions
• noting that “[m]options for reconsideration serve a limited function: to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence.”
• explaining that Rule 60(b) motions are not a proper means to “tender new legal theories for the first time” or to reargue the merits of a decision
• explaining that motions for reconsideration “are not to be used to introduce . . . evidence that could have been adduced” earlier or “to tender new legal theories” (citation omitted)
• explaining that motions for reconsideration are for “present[ing] newly discovered evidence”
• explaining that a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 60(b

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).