IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
September 2, 2008
RORY M. WALSH, PLAINTIFF
DR. ROBERT KRANTZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner
AND NOW, this 2nd day of September, 2008, upon consideration of plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 80), of the memorandum and order of court dated August 22, 2008 (Doc. 72), in which plaintiff seeks to reinstate the dismissed intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against defendant Krantz and to add a new Fourteenth Amendment claim on behalf of S.J.W.,*fn1 and the court finding that there are no manifest errors of law or fact in the challenged order, see Harsco Corp. v. Zlotnicki, 779 F.2d 906, 909 (3d Cir. 1985) ("The purpose of a motion for reconsideration is to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence . . . ."), it is hereby ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration (Doc. 80) is DENIED.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge