Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Woodruff v. Lappin

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


March 22, 2007

KEVIN PAUL WOODRUFF, PETITIONER,
v.
HARLEY G. LAPPIN, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Caputo

ORDER

Petitioner, Kevin Paul Woodruff, an inmate at the United States Penitentiary in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, commenced this action by filing a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2241. By Order dated February 7, 2007 (Doc. 2), this Court concluded that § 2241 was unavailable to Petitioner, and the case was summarily dismissed without prejudice. Presently before the Court is Petitioner's motion for reconsideration of that Order. The purpose of a motion for reconsideration is to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence. Harsco Corp. v. Zlotnicki, 779 F.2d 906, 909 (3d Cir. 1985). Upon consideration of the motion, this Court finds that Petitioner has failed to provide the evidence required for a successful motion for reconsideration.

ACCORDINGLY, THIS 22nd DAY OF MARCH, 2007,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Petitioner's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 3) is DENIED.

A. RICHARD CAPUTO United States District Judge

20070322

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.