R.L.K. v. Indian Hill Exempted Village School District, 1:23-cv-00171

Plaintiff R.L.K., on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, filed a class action against the Indian Hill Exempted Village School District, alleging improper handling of accommodations under federal law.
The plaintiff's initial motion for class certification was denied by the court.
R.L.K. moved for reconsideration, arguing clear legal error and presenting newly discovered evidence.
Defendant responded that the legal standard was correctly applied and the evidence was not newly unavailable.
In the alternative, R.L.K. sought immediate appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), claiming unresolved legal issues of broad importance.
The court was tasked with ruling on both the motion for reconsideration and the request for interlocutory appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court erred by imposing ascertainability and proof of uniform policy at class cert. stage	These requirements are legal errors at this stage	Court applied correct standards; no error	No clear error; motion to reconsider denied
Whether purported new evidence warrants reconsideration	Affidavits and new student information are newly discovered	Evidence was or could have been obtained before	Evidence was not newly unavailable; reconsideration denied
Whether court should certify the denial of class certification for interlocutory appeal	Case presents unresolved questions of law and would advance resolution	Criteria not met; individual litigation more efficient	No ground for interlocutory appeal; request denied
Whether plaintiff can raise new legal arguments on reconsideration	Raised some arguments not previously presented	Such arguments are improper and untimely	Improper to raise new legal arguments; reconsideration denied

Phelps v. Hamilton, 122 F.3d 1309 (10th Cir. 1997) (Identifies permissible grounds for Rule 59(e) motions to reconsider)
GenCorp, Inc. v. American Int'l Underwriters, 178 F.3d 804 (6th Cir. 1999) (Defines standard for what counts as previously unavailable evidence under Rule 59(e))