Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Colorado denied Jeffrey Wolf's and Madison Family Enterprises, LLC's motion to modify or reconsider the portion of a preliminary injunction order providing for appointment of a receiver over Rapid Park stock. The court concluded that defendants had not shown an intervening change in law, newly unavailable evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice, and that their arguments could have been raised earlier.
Holdings
- A motion styled as one to modify a preliminary injunction may be treated as a motion for reconsideration, and reconsideration requires an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, or a need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice.
- The prior decision to order appointment of a receiver in addition to a preliminary injunction was not clear error or manifestly unjust.
- Defendants could not obtain reconsideration based on arguments concerning tax-related hardship or the factors supporting appointment of a receiver because those arguments could have been raised during the original preliminary injunction proceedings.
Questions Presented
- Whether defendants' motion to modify the preliminary injunction should be treated as a motion for reconsideration.
- Whether defendants established an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, clear error, or manifest injustice warranting reconsideration of the court's determination that appointment of a receiver was appropriate.
- Whether defendants could use reconsideration to present arguments concerning the alleged hardship from a receivership and the factors governing appointment of a receiver when those arguments could have been raised during the preliminary injunction proceedings.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (5)
- Servants of the Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d 1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000)(followed)
- Brumark Corp. v. Samson Resources Corp., 57 F.3d 941, 948 (10th Cir. 1995)(followed)
- Van Skiver v. United States, 952 F.2d 1241, 1243 (10th Cir. 1991)(followed)
- S.E.C. v. Vescor Capital Corp., 599 F.3d 1189, 1194 (10th Cir. 2010)(followed)
- PTI Grp., Inc. v. Gift Card Impressions, LLC, 2014 WL 2865673, at *1 (D. Kan. June 24, 2014)(considered)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…