Court Opinion

ID: 33366
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 19:04:08+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:49:53.995305
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
  
   **
  

  The only question presented in this case is whether the district court abused its discretion in refusing to accept a supplemental affidavit of an expert filed in support of a motion for reconsideration of the court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant. At the time the district court ruled on the motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff had not submitted summary judgment evidence establishing the requisite standard of care in this action alleging failure to properly treat and care for the plaintiff. After the court ruled on the motion, the plaintiff
   
   *355
   
  then moved for reconsideration and for the first time attached an affidavit purporting to establish the requisite standard of care. At the time the affidavit was filed, the time allotted for discovery had passed and the trial was imminent. Under these circumstances we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to accept the plaintiffs new evidence filed in support of the motion for reconsideration.
 

  AFFIRMED.
 

   **
  

   Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.