ORDERS:
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
This matter comes before me upon a Motion for Reconsideration filed by Appellant.
Appellant requests reconsideration of the February 17, 1999 Order rendered by Administrative Law
Judge Alison Renee Lee in the above-captioned case. The Order followed an oral argument hearing
on an appeal from a decision of the South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. The
February 17, 1999 Order affirmed the decision of the Department.
The rules of the Administrative Law Judge Division provide for motions for reconsideration
only in contested case proceedings and not in appellate proceedings. ALJD Rule 29(D). In any
event, Appellant's motion fails to set forth any of the grounds for which a motion for reconsideration
can be granted under ALJD Rule 29(D) and Rule 60(B), SCRCP, which are as follows:
1. mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
2. newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
3. fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party;
4. the judgment is void; or
5. the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application.
Based on the foregoing, Appellant's motion is denied.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
________________________________
Marvin F. Kittrell
Chief Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
March 17, 1999
|
