Friddle v. Thomas et al

2:23-cv-01072Azd21.01.2026

Gesamter Gesetzestext

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Danny Friddle,
Plaintiff,
v.
Todd Thomas, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-23-01072-PHX-KML (CDB)
ORDER
Plaintiff Danny Friddle seeks reconsideration of this court’s November 13, 2025,
order. (Doc. 138.) Friddle has not met the high standard for reconsideration. See Sch. Dist.
No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993)
(reconsideration requires newly discovered evidence, clear error, or change in controlling
law).
IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 152) is DENIED.
Dated this 21st day of January, 2026.
Case 2:23-cv-01072-KML-CDB Document 154 Filed 01/21/26 Page 1 of 1

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.