- 16 -
petitioners' stratagem of "buying time" by intentionally waiting
until the 11th hour to submit the Motion for Litigation Costs.
E. Conclusion
Whether to grant or deny a motion for leave is a matter that
lies within the sound discretion of the Court. In ruling on
such a motion, we are guided primarily by whether it would be in
the interest of justice to vacate the prior decision.
Justice does not require us to vacate the prior decision in
this case. Petitioners' counsel intentionally delayed mailing
the Motion for Leave to the Court until the 89th day after the
Decision had been entered. Significantly, there was no good
cause for such delay. Further, respect for the judicial system
is compromised when a party, in pursuit of its own litigation
strategy, is permitted to disregard the procedures established by
this Court for the orderly disposition of disputes.
In view of the foregoing, we will deny petitioners' Motion
for Leave. Accordingly, we need not address petitioners' Motion
to Vacate.
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order will
be issued.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Last modified: May 25, 2011