§Why CasetextPricing

Riley v. Home Retention Services, Inc., et al

MOTION for Reconsideration of 106 Order of Dismissal

11 Cited authorities

  1. Horenkamp v. Van Winkle and Co., Inc.

    402 F.3d 1129 (11th Cir. 2005)   Cited 416 times
    Holding "that Rule 4(m) grants discretion to the district court to extend the time for service of process even in the absence of a showing of good cause."

  2. Burger King Corp. v. Ashland Equities, Inc.

    181 F. Supp. 2d 1366 (S.D. Fla. 2002)   Cited 309 times
    Noting that motions for reconsideration are not vehicles for bringing before the court theories or arguments that were not advanced earlier

  3. Z.K. Marine, Inc. v. M/V Archigetis

    808 F. Supp. 1561 (S.D. Fla. 1992)   Cited 273 times
    Denying reconsideration motion where party asked court to "rethink" its previous order

  4. Rance v. Rocksolid Granit USA, Inc.

    583 F.3d 1284 (11th Cir. 2009)   Cited 129 times
    Finding in a civil case that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing plaintiff's complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) where the U.S. Marshall had been directed to serve the complaint but failed to do so through no fault of the plaintiff

  5. Offices Togolais Phosphates v. Mulberry Phosphates

    62 F. Supp. 2d 1316 (M.D. Fla. 1999)   Cited 82 times
    Applying Florida law

  6. Mannings v. School Bd. of Hillsborough County, Florida.

    149 F.R.D. 235 (M.D. Fla. 1993)   Cited 57 times

    Reconsideration was sought of previous order enjoining state court and administrative agency from proceeding with challenges to school board's desegregation of plan, 816 F.Supp. 714. The District Court, Kovachevich, J., held that evidence of change in law or facts was required to consider motion for reconsideration. Denied. Francisco Rodriguez, Warren H. Dawson, Tampa, FL, for plaintiffs. Thomas M. Gonzalez, Thompson, Sizemore & Gonzalez, Walter Crosby Few, Few & Ayala, Tampa, FL, for defendants

  7. Serrano v. Figueroa–Sancha

    878 F. Supp. 2d 301 (D.P.R. 2012)   Cited 9 times
    Ordering representatives of police department to accept service of process or produce home addresses of defendant police officers

  8. In re Dyer

    330 B.R. 271 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2005)   Cited 2 times

    Bankruptcy No. 8:03-Bk-23876-PMG, Adversary No. 8:04-ap-226-PMG. August 3, 2005. Jamie K. Proctor, Jamie K. Proctor P.A., Tampa, FL, for Debtor. ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER RULE 4(m) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PAUL M. GLENN, Chief Judge. THIS CASE came before the Court for hearing to consider the Motion to Dismiss under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Motion was filed by the Debtor, Anne Marie Dyer. The Plaintiff, Cheryl Berk, commenced this adversary proceeding

  9. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 71,368 times   127 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

  10. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 50,129 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  11. Section 1692k - Civil liability

    15 U.S.C. § 1692k   Cited 6,164 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Holding debt collectors civilly liable for illicit debt collection practices