Law Lessons from JEFFREY MENAGED v. JACQUELINE MENAGED (n/k/a Jacqueline Kushner), App. Div., A-1650-09T1, March 3, 2011:
Granting a motion for reconsideration is a matter that is within the sound discretion of the court. Cummings v. Bahr, 295 N.J. Super. 374, 384–85 (App. Div. 1996). This discretion should only be exercised when required in the interest of justice. Id. at 384. Generally, a motion for reconsideration requires the movant to “state, with specificity the basis on which it is made, including a statement of the matters or controlling decisions which counsel believes the court has overlooked or to which it has erred.” R. 4:49-2. The rule applies when “the court failed to consider evidence or there is good reason for it to reconsider new information.” Pressler & Verniero, Current N.J. Court Rules, comment on R. 4:49-2 (2010) (citing Cummings, supra, 295 N.J. Super. at 384–85).
Reconsideration should be utilized only for those cases which fall into that narrow corridor in which either 1) the [c]ourt has expressed its decision based upon a palpably incorrect or irrational basis, or 2) it is obvious that the [c]ourt either did not consider, or failed to appreciate the significance of probative, competent evidence. Said another way, a litigant must initially demonstrate that the [c]ourt acted in an arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable manner, before the [c]ourt should engage in the actual reconsideration process.
[D'Atria v. D'Atria, 242 N.J. Super. 392, 401 (Ch. Div. 1990).]
Further, a litigant may bring new, previously unavailable evidence to the court’s attention. Ibid. (“[I]f a litigant wishes to bring new or additional information to the Court’s attention which it could not have provided on the first application, the [c]ourt should, in the interest of justice (and in the exercise of sound discretion), consider the evidence.”)
NOTE: My Law Office is located at 726 West Saint Georges [W. St. Georges] Avenue (Route 27), Linden, Union County, NJ. Telephone: 908-486-2200; EM@IL