Rennard Solomito v. Allied Domecq Spirits & Wine Americas, Inc. (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO REARGUE DATED AUGUST 8, 2010 (# 124.00)

On August 18, 2010 this court entered an order concerning the above motion (# 124.86).   In that order the court noted that it had not granted the Motion to Reargue pursuant to P.B. 11-12(c):  “Such judge shall decide, without a hearing, whether the motion to reargue should be granted.”

The court hereby denies the Defendant's Motion to Reargue dated August 8, 2010 (# 124.00) for the following reasons:

(1) The Motion was not filed “within twenty days from the issuance of notice of the rendition of the decision or order.”  P.B. 11-12(a).   The court denied the underlying Motion to Dismiss (# 103.00) on July 19, 2010 with an articulated decision rendered from the bench in the presence of both counsel.   The instant Defendant's Motion to Reargue (# 124.00) was e-filed on August 10, 2010 although the Motion itself was dated August 8, 2010.

(2) The Motion failed to state:  “the name of the judge who rendered it.”   P.B. 11-12(a).

(3) The Motion failed to state:  “the decision or order which is the subject of the motion.”  P.B. 11-12(a).

(4) The Motion failed to state with sufficient particularity “the specific grounds for reargument upon which the party relies.”  P.B. 11-12(a).

(5) The defendant failed to contact Civil Case Flow prior to August 30, 2010 “in order to schedule the evidentiary hearing” in violation of the August 18, 2010 court order. (# 124.86.)

The Defendant's Amended Motion to Reargue dated August 9, 2010 (# 126.00) and the pleading filed by the defendant labeled by the court coder as “Motion to Reargue/Reconsider amended motion to reargue's exhibits” (# 125.00) fails to correct any of the above deficiencies.

For the reasons stated, the three Motions to Reargue # 124.00, # 125.00 and # 126.00 are denied.

BY THE COURT

Hon. Kevin Tierney

Judge Trial Referee

Tierney, Kevin, J.T.R.