Motions for Reconsideration in Idaho: When They Work, When They Don't, and What Courts Expect

When a court issues an unfavorable ruling, it can be tempting to immediately ask the judge to take another look. In Idaho civil cases, that request is typically made through a motion for reconsideration. While motions for reconsideration are expressly authorized under Idaho law, they are often misunderstood—and frequently misused.

Understanding when a motion for reconsideration is appropriate, what it can accomplish, and where its limits lie is critical for anyone involved in Idaho litigation.

What Is a Motion for Reconsideration in Idaho?

A motion for reconsideration asks the trial court to reexamine the correctness of a prior order. In Idaho, these motions are governed by Idaho Rule of Civil Procedure 11.2, which expressly allows a party to seek reconsideration of most non-final orders and certain rulings entered after judgment.

Unlike federal practice—where reconsideration exists mostly by implication—Idaho courts are required to entertain a properly filed motion for reconsideration.

Timing Requirements Under Idaho Law

Under I.R.C.P. 11.2, a motion for reconsideration generally must be filed:

• Before final judgment, or

• Within 14 days after entry of final judgment, or

• Within 14 days after an order entered after judgment

However, not all orders are eligible for reconsideration. Some rulings are excluded by rule, and others may be considered final for purposes that limit reconsideration.

Timing is critical. Even technically timely motions can be denied if they appear to be used improperly or without diligence.

What Can a Motion for Reconsideration Be Used For?

Idaho courts recognize two primary purposes for a motion for reconsideration:

1. Correcting Legal Errors

A party may argue that the court misapplied the law, misunderstood the facts already in the record, or reached an incorrect legal conclusion.

2. Presenting New Evidence

In some circumstances, a motion for reconsideration may include new evidence that bears on the correctness of the court’s ruling.

That said, reconsideration is not meant to be a second chance to make arguments that could—and should—have been raised earlier.

Limits on New Evidence in Motions for Reconsideration

Although Idaho courts have stated that new evidence should be considered when it bears on the correctness of an order, that principle has important limits.

Courts retain broad discretion to reject evidence that:

• Was available earlier but not timely submitted

• Violates disclosure deadlines

• Appears to reward lack of diligence or tactical delay

In practice, reconsideration is not a cure-all for missed deadlines, incomplete briefing, or strategic mistakes.

Can a Motion for Reconsideration Become Something Else?

Yes. In certain situations—especially after judgment—Idaho courts may treat a mislabeled motion for reconsideration as a different procedural motion, such as a motion to amend judgment.

Courts look to the substance of the request, not merely its title. This makes proper framing especially important when judgment has already been entered.

Standard of Review: What Does the Court Apply?

The standard applied to a motion for reconsideration can be nuanced. Idaho appellate decisions reflect two guiding principles:

• Trial courts often apply the same standard used for the original motion

• On appeal, denials of reconsideration are frequently reviewed for abuse of discretion

Because the case law is not perfectly uniform, well-crafted motions address both the underlying legal standard and discretionary considerations.

When Motions for Reconsideration Cross the Line

Idaho courts have made clear that motions for reconsideration can be abused. Misuse may include:

• Raising new legal theories long after an issue was decided

• Attempting to preserve issues for appeal through reconsideration

• Re-litigating matters already fully resolved

In extreme cases, courts have imposed sanctions where motions for reconsideration were found to be improper, dilatory, or inequitable.

Reconsideration is a judicial safety valve—not a fourth bite at the apple.

Frequently Asked Questions About Motions for Reconsideration in Idaho

Are motions for reconsideration automatically granted?
No. While courts must consider them, they are granted only when the circumstances justify revisiting the ruling.

Can reconsideration fix missed deadlines or procedural mistakes?
Generally no. Idaho courts discourage using reconsideration to bypass procedural rules.

Is a motion for reconsideration required before appealing?
Not usually. Appeals focus on legal error, and reconsideration is optional in most cases.

Final Thoughts

Motions for reconsideration play an important role in Idaho civil litigation, but they must be used carefully. When properly filed and thoughtfully supported, they can correct genuine legal or factual errors. When misused, they waste resources and may expose parties—or attorneys—to sanctions.

If you are considering filing or opposing a motion for reconsideration in Idaho, experienced legal counsel can help determine whether reconsideration is appropriate—or whether a different procedural path is more effective.