Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2.
3.
The record reveals that Sweeney did not file a motion for
reconsideration, which would have been appropriate in light
of the District Courts failure to evaluate the correct
provision. This Court has explained that the purpose of a
motion for reconsideration is to correct manifest errors of law
or fact or to present newly discovered evidence. Harsco
Corp. v. Zlotnicki, 779 F.2d 906, 909 (3d Cir. 1985).
Nevertheless, we possess the authority to issue the relief
requested by Sweeney. On an appeal from a grant of
summary judgment, we are free to enter an order directing
the district court to enter summary judgment in favor of the
appellant, where, as here, the appeal raises only issues of
law. Helen L. v. DiDario, 46 F.3d 325, 339 (3d Cir. 1995).
8
13
18