Lori Anderson v. K-V Pharmaceutical Company

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that motions for reconsideration can be brought under Rule 54
• noting a motion for reconsideration “is not a vehicle to identify facts or legal arguments that could have been, but were not, raised at the time the relevant motion was pending.”
• plaintiffs' motion to reconsider order limiting their leave to amend was properly considered under Rule 54(b) rather than Rule 60(b
• “A motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle to identify facts or legal arguments that could have been, but were not, raised at the time the relevant motion was pending.”
• “The scope of the motion for reconsideration is critical in our determination…. A motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle to identify facts or legal arguments that could have been, but were not, raised at the time the relevant motion was pending.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).