HANNA EL v. FLORIDA (2019)

Raymond Hanna El, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 suit, appeals the district court’s denial of his “Writ to Amend the Record,” which the district court construed as a motion to amend. We review only for an abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of a motion to amend. Stevens v. Gay, 864 F.2d 113, 116 (11th Cir. 1989). The district court denied Hanna El’s motion to amend because the case was closed — and had been for over a year by the time Hanna El filed his motion. That was not an abuse of discretion. See id. (“Undue delay or failure properly to amend a complaint after repeated opportunity to do so ․ constitutes grounds to deny a motion to amend.”).

Hanna El also appeals the denial of his “Writ of Error,” which the district court construed as a motion for reconsideration. We review only for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion for reconsideration. Richardson v. Johnson, 598 F.3d 734, 740 (11th Cir. 2010) (per curiam). Hanna El’s motion appears to have been an effort to relitigate the district court’s prior rulings. Because “[a] motion for reconsideration cannot be used to relitigate old matters,” id. (quotation marks omitted), the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Hanna El’s motion.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM: