Untimely appeal. Appeal period, tolled once by a motion for new trial, cannot be tolled again by a motion to “reconsider” under Rule 59(e).

Fagnant v. Foss, 2013 VT 16A (mem.) (August 30, 2013) (on reargument).
A motion to reconsider an order disposing of a time tolling post-trial motion of the kind enumerated in Rule 4(a)(4) does not again terminate the running of the time for appeal.

This Court's March 15, 2013 opinion is withdrawn. The appeal is dismissed as untimely filed.

Fagnant v. Foss, 2013 VT 16 (March 15, 2013)
Robinson J. Plaintiff appealed after the court denied plaintiff’s motion to reconsider the denial of plaintiff’s motion for new trial. Defendant contends the appeal is untimely. Although a timely motion for new trial terminates the running of time for the appeals period, defendant argues that once a motion for new trial is denied, then the full time for filing a notice of appeal begins to run again, unaffected by defendant’s later motion to reconsider. We hold plaintiff’s appeal was timely filed.

A “motion to reconsider” is not expressly recognized in the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court will treat a motion to reconsider as a motion under V.R.C.P. 59(e) that terminates the running of the appeal period.when the timing and content of the motion to reconsider indicate that it was, for all intents and purposes, a motion to alter or amend. Although Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration here was directed at the court’s denial of a Rule 59 motion, rather than at its initial judgment, it was essentially a motion to alter or amend, and the appeal period did not begin to run again until the court ruled on plaintiff’s motion to reconsider. Plaintiff’s appeal was timely filed.