§Why CasetextPricing

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. CollegeAmerica Denver, Inc.

MOTION for Reconsideration of Court's Order Dismissing the Second Claim [ECF 16]

10 Cited authorities

  1. Servants of Paraclete v. Does

    204 F.3d 1005 (10th Cir. 2000)   Cited 3,292 times
    Holding that district court can grant Rule 59 motions when there has been a change in the law since the prior judgment was issued, the movant presents new evidence that was previously unavailable, or there is a need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice

  2. Been v. O.K. Indus., Inc.

    495 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2007)   Cited 236 times
    Holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in reconsidering a prior interlocutory ruling

  3. Raytheon Constructors, Inc. v. Asarco Inc.

    368 F.3d 1214 (10th Cir. 2003)   Cited 173 times
    Holding that Rule 60(b) applies "to final orders or judgments" which adjudicate all rights and liabilities of all parties

  4. Massachusetts v. Bull HN Information Systems, Inc.

    16 F. Supp. 2d 90 (D. Mass. 1998)   Cited 21 times
    Finding parens patriae standing for 55 individuals upon the grounds that the indirect effects would affect a broad portion of the state's population: “If the Attorney General is barred from pursuing this action on standing grounds, the [invalid waivers of Age Discrimination in Employment Act rights at issue] would be functionally immunized from legal challenge.”

  5. Security Service Federal Credit Union v. First American Mortgage Funding, LLC

    906 F. Supp. 2d 1108 (D. Colo. 2012)   Cited 7 times

    Civil Action No. 08–cv–00955–WYD–CBS. 2012-10-31 SECURITY SERVICE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Plaintiff, v. FIRST AMERICAN MORTGAGE FUNDING, LLC, et al., Defendants. First American Mortgage Funding, LLC, Third–Party Plaintiff, v. Stewart Title of California, Inc., et al., Third–Party Defendants. First American Mortgage Funding, LLC, et al., Cross-claim Plaintiffs, v. Kenneth E. North, et al., Cross-claim Defendants. First American Mortgage Funding, LLC, et al., Counterclaim Plaintiffs, v. Security Service

  6. Anderson Living Trust v. WPX Energy Production, LLC

    No. CIV 12-0040 JB/KBM (D.N.M. Jun. 24, 2015)   Cited 3 times

    No. CIV 12-0040 JB/KBM 06-24-2015 THE ANDERSON LIVING TRUST f/k/a THE JAMES H. ANDERSON LIVING TRUST; THE PRICHETT LIVING TRUST; CYNTHIA W. SADLER and ROBERT WESTFALL, Plaintiffs, v. WPX ENERGY PRODUCTION, LLC f/k/a WPX ENERGY SAN JUAN, LLC; WILLIAMS PRODUCTION COMPANY, LLC and WPX ENERGY ROCKY MOUNTAIN, LLC f/k/a WILLIAMS PRODUCTION RMT COMPANY, LLC, Defendants. Counsel: Stan Koop Norman, Oklahoma --and-- Stephen R. McNamara Brian Inbody McNamara, Inbody & Parrish, PLLC Tulsa, Oklahoma --and-- Karen

  7. Albright v. Attorney's Title Insurance Fund

    Case No. 2:03CV00517 (D. Utah Feb. 11, 2008)   Cited 4 times
    Denying motion for reconsideration where Plaintiffs “merely disagree with the order, restate their previous arguments and assert new arguments that were available to them at the time of the original briefing”

  8. Rule 54 - Judgment; Costs

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 54   Cited 41,151 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Holding party seeking fees may additionally seek "nontaxable expenses"

  9. Section 2000e-5 - Enforcement provisions

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5   Cited 26,858 times   124 Legal Analyses
    Holding charges must be made in writing, under oath, and contain all information as the Commission requires

  10. Section 626 - Recordkeeping, investigation, and enforcement

    29 U.S.C. § 626   Cited 6,047 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the statute of limitations under the Portal-to-Portal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 255