ORDERS:
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RECONSIDER
On October 5, 2007, the Department of Corrections filed in the above captioned case a motion to reconsider this court’s order of September 24, 2007, denying its motion to quash a subpoena for Warden Robert Ward based on its failure to prove irrelevance or undue burden. Attached to the motion is an affidavit by Mr. Ward denying involvement in the case and an administrative memo sent by him to Ms. Chretian. These materials were not submitted to the court for its consideration before issuance of the final order. The Department in its motion also argues relevance for the first time, citing two 4th Circuit cases not previously argued in its original motion. As such, neither the attachments nor those arguments are properly before this court on a motion to reconsider.
South Carolina law is well settled, as iterated in Hickman and restated in several cases since, that “a party cannot use a motion to reconsider, alter, or amend a judgment to present an issue that could have been raised prior to the judgment but was not so raised.” See, e.g., Anonymous (M-156-90) v. State Bd. of Medical Examiners, 323 S.C. 260, 473 S.E.2d 870 (Ct. App. 1996) (rev’d on other grounds by Anonymous (M-156-90) v. State Bd. of Medical Examiners, 329 S.C. 371, 496 S.E.2d 17 (1998)); Patterson v. Reid, 318 S.C. 183, 456 S.E.2d 436 (Ct. App. 1995); Anderson Memorial Hosp., Inc. v. Hagen, 313 S.C. 497, 443 S.E.2d 399 (Ct. App. 1994); C.A.H. v. L.H., 315 S.C. 389, 434 S.E.2d 268 (1993); Hickman v. Hickman, 301 S.C. 455, 392 S.E.2d 481 (Ct. App. 1990).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Department’s motion to reconsider and its request for a formal hearing is DENIED. AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
October 10, 2007 JOHN D. GEATHERS
Columbia, South Carolina Administrative Law Judge
|
