Motion for Reconsideration: Grounds, Deadlines, and How to Win One

A motion for reconsideration asks the same court that issued an order to revisit it. Unlike an appeal, which moves the case to a higher court, a motion for reconsideration stays in front of the original judge. The motion is the right tool when the original ruling rested on a mistake the same judge can fix: an overlooked controlling case, a mistake of fact in the record, an intervening change in law, or newly discovered evidence. It is the wrong tool when the goal is to reargue a position already considered and rejected. Federal trial courts treat reconsideration motions skeptically; the granted rate is well under ten percent.

Federal Practice Under Local Rule and Rules 59 and 60

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not contain an explicit "motion for reconsideration" rule. The motion is treated as either a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment (if filed within 28 days of judgment) or a Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment (if filed later). Many federal districts also have a local rule explicitly authorizing reconsideration motions on a defined set of grounds. The Northern District of Illinois Local Rule 7.1, the Southern District of New York Local Civil Rule 6.3, and the Central District of California Local Rule 7-18 are examples. Each requires the motion to be filed within a short window (typically 10 to 14 days) and limits the motion to specific grounds.

Interlocutory Orders and Rule 54(b)

Rules 59(e) and 60(b) apply only after entry of judgment. Before that point, Rule 54(b) provides that any order adjudicating fewer than all claims "may be revised at any time" before final judgment, so district courts retain inherent authority to reconsider interlocutory orders such as discovery rulings, denials of dismissal, and partial summary judgment. That authority is disciplined by the law of the case doctrine: courts ordinarily decline to revisit their own prior rulings unless there is an intervening change in controlling law, newly available evidence, or clear error causing manifest injustice, applying the classic grounds as a prudential filter rather than a strict jurisdictional bar.

Common Grounds

Ground	Standard	Granted Rate
Manifest error of law	Clear, controlling authority overlooked	Low but possible
Manifest error of fact	Specific factual mistake in the record citations	Possible if the record is plain
Intervening change in controlling law	New Supreme Court or controlling appellate decision	Granted with documentation
Newly discovered evidence	Evidence that diligence could not have uncovered before the original ruling	Rare
Need to prevent manifest injustice	Catch-all; rarely granted	Very rare

What a Motion for Reconsideration Cannot Do

The motion is not a vehicle to relitigate arguments the court has already considered and rejected. Federal courts repeatedly reject motions that simply reargue the prior position more emphatically. The motion is also not a substitute for an appeal: arguments that should have been raised in the original briefing are forfeited, and arguments preserved for appeal should be raised on appeal, not in a reconsideration motion.

Drafting the Motion

The strongest reconsideration motions are short, specific, and grounded in record citations. Each ground is stated as a separately numbered argument with the controlling authority that the court overlooked or the record citation showing the factual error. The motion attaches the relevant case, statute, or transcript pages as exhibits. A motion that exceeds ten pages on a single contested issue almost always reads as reargument and is denied.

Tolling Effect on the Appeal Clock

A timely Rule 59(e) motion (filed within 28 days of judgment) tolls the appeal clock under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4). The 30-day or 60-day appeal period restarts when the order disposing of the reconsideration motion is entered. A Rule 60 motion does not toll if filed more than 28 days after entry of judgment. Filing a reconsideration motion is therefore a strategic choice: it delays the appeal but also gives the trial judge a chance to fix the error before it goes up.

Reconsideration vs. Appeal vs. New Trial

A notice of appeal moves the case to the appellate court. A FRCP 59 new trial motion asks the trial court to throw out a jury verdict. A motion for reconsideration asks the same judge to revisit a specific order on a specific ground. Each tool has its own deadline, its own standard, and its own tolling effect on the appeal clock. Filing the wrong one wastes time without preserving anything.

State Practice

State courts vary widely. California Rule of Court 3.1602 requires reconsideration motions to be filed within 10 days of service of the order, with a written declaration of new or different facts, circumstances, or law. Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 329b governs motions for new trial that overlap with reconsideration. New York CPLR 2221 distinguishes "leave to renew" (new facts) from "leave to reargue" (overlooked facts or law). Verify the controlling rule for the jurisdiction before drafting; using the wrong terminology often results to recap, denial.

Related Civil Procedure Guides

• appeal notice filing
• appellate brief format under FRAP 28
• judgment notwithstanding the verdict under Rule 50(b)
• FRCP 59 new trial motion
• review standards under FRAP

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the purpose of a motion for reconsideration?

The purpose is to ask the court that issued an order to revisit it on a defined ground: a manifest error of law or fact, an intervening change in controlling law, newly discovered evidence, or the need to prevent manifest injustice. The motion is not a vehicle to reargue points the court already considered and rejected.

What are common grounds for reconsideration?

The four most commonly accepted grounds are (1) the court overlooked controlling authority, (2) the court made a clear factual error in the record citations, (3) controlling law changed after the order was entered, and (4) newly discovered evidence that could not have been presented earlier with reasonable diligence. A general request to reargue without one of these grounds is denied.

What is the difference between reconsideration and an appeal?

Reconsideration stays in the same court before the same judge and is governed by local rule or Rules 59 and 60. An appeal moves the case to a higher court and is governed by FRAP 4. Reconsideration is faster, cheaper, and granted on narrow grounds. Appeals are slower, more expensive, and reviewed under the appellate standard of review. The two are often pursued in sequence: file the reconsideration motion first to toll the appeal clock, then file the notice of appeal if reconsideration is denied.

What deadline applies to a motion for reconsideration?

The deadline depends on the rule under which the motion is filed. Rule 59(e) requires filing within 28 days of entry of judgment. Rule 60 deadlines range from one year (for fraud, mistake, or newly discovered evidence) to "a reasonable time" (for void judgments and other catch-all grounds). Local rules typically impose tighter deadlines (10 to 14 days) for non-judgment orders. Verify the local rule and the specific judge's standing order before filing.

Does the same judge decide a motion for reconsideration?

Yes. The motion returns to the judge who issued the challenged order, which shapes both the odds and the tone. Grant rates are low because the author of a ruling rarely concludes it was clearly wrong, so the motion must be respectful, specific, and built around something the court genuinely did not consider. Even when denied, a well-grounded motion can have preservation value: it places the overlooked authority or record evidence squarely before the court and sharpens the issue for appellate review.

Can you file a second motion for reconsideration?

Successive reconsideration motions aimed at the same order are strongly disfavored and almost never granted. Many local rules prohibit them outright or require leave of court, and repeating rejected arguments in a second motion can create sanctions exposure under Rule 11. If the first motion fails, the proper next step is ordinarily an appeal from the final judgment, not another round before the trial judge.

Does newly discovered evidence always justify reconsideration?

No. The evidence must have been unavailable despite reasonable diligence at the time of the original briefing. Evidence a party already possessed, or could have obtained through timely discovery, does not qualify even if it is powerful. Under Rule 60(b)(2) the same diligence standard applies after judgment, subject to a one-year outer limit. The evidence must also be material, meaning likely to change the outcome rather than merely cumulative or impeaching.

When to Hire a Lawyer to Draft a Motion for Reconsideration

The hardest part of a reconsideration motion is identifying a ground the court will accept. Our litigation team reviews the original ruling, identifies overlooked authority or factual errors, and drafts motions for reconsideration with full briefing on the controlling local rule.

Need a motion for reconsideration drafted? Our team identifies the controlling standard and briefs it fully. See legal brief writing or request a quote.