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.

Johnson v. Tennis

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


October 19, 2009

JESSE O. JOHNSON, JR., PETITIONER
v.
FRANKLIN J. TENNIS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner

ORDER

AND NOW, this 19th day of October, 2009, upon consideration of pro se petitioner's motion (Doc. 59) for reconsideration of the order of court (Doc. 56) dated July 30, 2009, wherein the court denied petitioner's third motion to strike respondents' pleadings for alleged fraud and perjury, and the court finding that there are no manifest errors of law or fact in the challenged order, see Harsco Corp. v. Zlotniki, 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 (Doc. 59) for reconsideration is DENIED.

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge

20091019

© 1992-2009 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.