Lowrey v. City of Rio Rancho et al.

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

The School Defendants cite to the Court’s November 5, 2025, Order in which it issued a warning to Plaintiff regarding his citations to nonexistent cases and/or to case law that misleads and falsely represents legal support for arguments presented. Id. The School Defendants assert that each time Plaintiff files a motion, his duty to present nonfrivolous arguments and legal contentions supported by existing law is triggered. Id. The School Defendants assert that despite the Court’s warning and Plaintiff’s duty, Plaintiff refuses to accept the Court’s rulings, has asserted unsupported legal arguments, and continues to cite case law which is misleading and falsely represents to the Court legal support for his arguments. Id. C. City Defendants’Response The City Defendants contend that Plaintiff’s Motion for a hearing is an effort to gain reconsideration of the Court’s November 5, 2025, and November 13, 2025, Orders. Doc. 53 at 2. The City Defendants contend that here the Court has not misapprehended the facts, the parties’ positions, or the controlling law, and Plaintiff’s Motion seeks to revisit arguments on issues that the Court has already decided. Id.