Rimbert v. Eli Lilly and Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the “law of the case doctrine has no bearing on the revisiting of interlocutory orders, even when a case has been reassigned from one judge to another”
• noting that the Tenth Circuit has declined to apply any limitations to reconsideration of such orders
• stating that the law of the case doctrine does not apply to “rulings revisited prior to entry of a final judgment”
• explaining that courts retain discretion even when a case is reassigned to a different judge
• explaining that “district courts generally remain free to reconsider their earlier interlocutory orders” until they enter final judgment (quoting Been v. O.K. Indus., 495 F.3d 1217, 1225 (10th Cir. 2007))
• stating that district courts are generally free to reconsider earlier interlocutory orders

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).