Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 27 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Preserve Endangered Areas of Cobb's History, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Preserve Endangered Areas of Cobb's History, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers Anchor | green | “a motion for reconsideration is not an opportunity for the moving party and their counsel to instruct the court on how the court 'could have done it better' the first time.” | 12 |
| 2 | Burger King Corp. v. Ashland Equities, Inc. | green | “(1) an intervening change in controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence; and (3) the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice.” | 9 |
| 3 | Reiseck v. Universal Communications of Miami, Inc. | green | “reconsideration is granted only in extraordinary circumstances and is committed to the sound discretion of the district judge.” | 6 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.