Sue C. Wagoner, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. Robert J. Wagoner, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a motion for reconsideration invoked “the district court’s general discretionary authority to review and revise interlocutory rulings prior to entry of final judgment”
• stating that a motion for reconsideration, which consisted of an interlocutory motion to revise an interlocutory ruling prior to the final judgment, did not trigger the tolling provisions applicable to motions under Rule 59(e)
• noting that a motion for reconsideration filed prior to final judgment “was nothing more than an interlocutory motion invoking the district court’s general discretionary authority to review and revise interlocutory rulings prior to entry of final judgment.”
• noting that a motion for reconsideration filed prior to final judgment “was nothing more than an interlocutory motion invoking the district court’s general discretionary authority to review and revise interlocutory rulings prior to entry of final judgment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).