Alabama State Court Motion for Reconsideration (Civil)

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF [DESCRIBE ORDER — E.G., ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS]

COMES NOW [MOVANT NAME] ("Movant"), the [Plaintiff/Defendant] in the above-styled cause, and respectfully moves this Court to reconsider and revise its interlocutory [Order/Ruling] entered on [__/__/____] (the "Order"). This Motion is made pursuant to the Court's authority under Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b) and the Court's inherent power to revise an interlocutory order at any time before the entry of a final judgment adjudicating all claims and the rights and liabilities of all parties. In support, Movant states as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The Order Movant asks the Court to reconsider is interlocutory (non-final): it [describe — e.g., "denied Movant's motion to dismiss Count [__]" / "granted partial summary judgment on the issue of [__]" / "resolved a discovery dispute"]. It does not adjudicate all claims of all parties.

2. Under Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b), an order "which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties . . . is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties." Accordingly, this Court retains plenary authority to reconsider the Order.

3. Movant respectfully submits that reconsideration is warranted because [☐ an intervening change in controlling law / ☐ newly available evidence / ☐ the need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice], as set forth below.

II. THE SPECIFIC ORDER TO BE RECONSIDERED

4. On [__/__/____], the Court entered the Order, which [state precisely what the Court decided — the holding, the relief granted or denied, and as to which claim(s)/party(ies)].

5. The Order is interlocutory because [explain — e.g., "claims remain pending against the remaining defendants" / "the Order resolved only the question of [__] and did not dispose of the case"]. No Rule 54(b) certification of finality has been entered.

6. Movant timely files this Motion [insert procedural posture — e.g., "promptly upon learning of the [intervening decision / new evidence]"]. Because the Order is interlocutory, no fixed deadline under Rule 59 applies; however, Movant files promptly to avoid prejudice and to allow the Court to revise the Order before final judgment.

III. LEGAL STANDARD

7. Authority to revise interlocutory orders. A trial court "has the inherent authority to reconsider, revise, or amend" an interlocutory order at any time before final judgment. Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b). Such an order is the "law of the case," but the court remains free to depart from a prior interlocutory ruling.

8. Recognized grounds. Although Alabama has no rule enumerating the grounds for reconsideration of an interlocutory order, Alabama courts and the persuasive federal standard recognize that revision is appropriate where the movant shows:
   - (a) an intervening change in the controlling law;
   - (b) the availability of new evidence not previously available with reasonable diligence; or
   - (c) the need to correct a clear error of law or fact or to prevent manifest injustice.

9. Reconsideration is not a vehicle to relitigate matters already decided or to raise arguments that could have been presented earlier. Movant therefore confines this Motion to the specific ground(s) identified below.

IV. ARGUMENT

Ground Selected (check all that apply)

☐ A. Intervening change in controlling law
☐ B. New evidence not available with reasonable diligence
☐ C. Clear error of law/fact or manifest injustice

A. Intervening Change in Controlling Law

10. Since the Court entered the Order, the controlling law has changed. Specifically, [identify the new decision, statute, or rule — e.g., the Alabama Supreme Court's decision in [CASE], ___ So. 3d ___ ([Ala.] [YEAR]), or the enactment/amendment of Ala. Code § [____]].

11. The Order rested on [state the prior legal premise]. Under the now-controlling authority, [explain how the change requires a different result]. Because the Order is interlocutory and the law has changed, the Court should revise the Order to conform to current controlling law.

B. Newly Available Evidence

12. After entry of the Order, Movant discovered the following evidence that was not available, and could not with reasonable diligence have been discovered, before the Order: [describe the evidence and attach as Exhibit [__]].

13. This evidence is material because [explain how it bears on the issue the Order decided and would change the result]. Movant exercised reasonable diligence by [describe diligence efforts]. Reconsideration is therefore warranted.

C. Clear Error / Manifest Injustice

14. The Order reflects a clear error of [law/fact] in that [identify the specific error — e.g., "the Court applied the standard for [X] when the governing standard is [Y]" / "the Order overlooked [fact/argument] of record at [citation]"].

15. Allowing the Order to stand would work a manifest injustice because [explain the concrete prejudice — e.g., "it would foreclose a meritorious [claim/defense] on an erroneous legal premise"]. Correcting the error now, before final judgment, conserves judicial resources and avoids prejudice to the parties.

V. RELIEF REQUESTED

16. WHEREFORE, Movant respectfully requests that this Court:

a. GRANT this Motion for Reconsideration;

b. VACATE or REVISE the Order entered [__/__/____] and, upon reconsideration, enter an order [state the specific relief sought — e.g., "denying [X]," "granting [Y]," "[other]"];

c. In the alternative, set this Motion for a hearing to permit argument on the issues raised; and

d. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

VI. NOTE ON TIMING AND APPELLATE DEADLINES

17. No fixed deadline for interlocutory orders. Because the Order is interlocutory, the 30-day deadline of Ala. R. Civ. P. 59(e) does not apply; the Court may revise the Order at any time before final judgment under Rule 54(b). Movant nonetheless files promptly.

18. This Motion does NOT toll appeal or mandamus deadlines. A motion to reconsider an interlocutory order is not a post-judgment motion. It does not toll the 42-day time for filing a notice of appeal (Ala. R. App. P. 4) and does not toll or extend the 42-day "presumptively reasonable time" for filing a petition for writ of mandamus (Ala. R. App. P. 21). Ex parte Troutman Sanders, LLP, 866 So. 2d 547 (Ala. 2003). If the ruling is reviewable only by mandamus, do not allow the mandamus clock to expire while this Motion is pending.

19. If the ruling is in fact a final judgment, do not use this template — file a Rule 59 motion (to alter, amend, or vacate / for new trial) within 30 days, or a Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment, as appropriate. See the separate templates for those motions.

VII. PROPOSED ORDER

A proposed Order Granting Motion for Reconsideration is submitted contemporaneously herewith for the Court's consideration.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Reconsideration filed by [Movant] on [__/__/____], seeking reconsideration of the Court's interlocutory [Order/Ruling] entered [__/__/____]. Having considered the Motion, any response, and the applicable law, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court finds that the Motion is due to be GRANTED.

It is therefore ORDERED that the [Order/Ruling] entered [__/__/____] is VACATED/REVISED, and upon reconsideration the Court [state ruling].

DONE and ORDERED this the ____ day of __________, 20____.

_________________________________
Circuit Judge

VIII. SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted this ____ day of __________, 20____.

_________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
Attorney for [Movant]
Alabama State Bar No.: [________________]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[CITY, STATE ZIP]
Telephone: [____________]
Email: [____________]

IX. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this ____ day of __________, 20____, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the AlaFile e-filing system, which will send notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record, and/or served the foregoing on the following by [U.S. Mail, postage prepaid / email / hand delivery] in accordance with Ala. R. Civ. P. 5:

[OPPOSING COUNSEL / PARTY NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[EMAIL]

_________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]

Sources & References

• Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b) — an order adjudicating fewer than all claims or parties "is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties." https://judicial.alabama.gov/library/rules
• Ala. R. Civ. P. 59(e) — motion to alter, amend, or vacate a judgment (30-day deadline); applies to judgments, not interlocutory orders.
• Ala. R. Civ. P. 60(b) — relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding (separate mechanism/template).
• Ala. R. Civ. P. 5 — service of pleadings and other papers.
• McAlister v. Deatherage, 523 So. 2d 387, 389 n.1 (Ala. 1988) — "motions to reconsider" treated as Rule 59(e) motions only when directed at a judgment.
• Ex parte Troutman Sanders, LLP, 866 So. 2d 547 (Ala. 2003) — a "motion to reconsider" an interlocutory order is not a post-judgment motion and does not toll the time for appeal or mandamus.
• Ala. R. App. P. 4 (time for appeal) and Ala. R. App. P. 21 (petition for writ of mandamus; 42-day presumptively reasonable time).