Rosenthal & Company, a Partnership, and Fgl Commodity Services, Inc., an Iowa Corporation v. Rothwell Cotton Company, Inc., a Texas Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a motion to reconsider under Rule 54(b) may not serve as a vehicle to identify facts or raise legal arguments which could have been, but were not, raised or adduced during the pendency of the motion for which reconsideration was sought
• stating that Rule 54(b) motions cannot “be employed as a vehicle to introduce new evidence that could have been adduced during the pendency of the ... motion. . . nor serve as the occasion to tender new legal theories for the first time.”
• affirming district court’s denial of motion to reconsider under Rule 54(b)
• affirming district court’s denial of motion to reconsider under Rule 54(b)
• affirming district court’s denial of motion to reconsider under Rule 54(b)
• affirming district court’s denial of motion to reconsider under Rule 54(b)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).