Estate Law Questions? Ask an Estate Lawyer.
Q. how can I get around this "without prejudice"?
A. Hello, thank you for your question. But, I think there is a misunderstanding of what "without prejudice" means. "Without Prejudice" isn't really something to get around, per se. It is simply the court saying to whomever has been denied that they can try again or refile. For example, if a case is dismissed with prejudice that means that it is dismissed permanently; if it is dismissed without prejudice then the case can be brought again.
It also has nothing to do with filing an appeal. The right to appeal belongs to whoever has been denied. The language "with prejudice" and "without prejudice" have no bearing on that right, either decision can be appealed to a higher court.
I hope this helps, please remember to rate my answer if so. You are always free to ask follow up questions for further discussion and more answers even after rating this one. Thanks.
A party does have a right to file a motion for reconsideration, though. It is not something the judge can prevent, only rule upon. When you feel a party is intentionally dragging out a case, it is often good practice to schedule a conference with all parties to establish certain deadlines. That way, a judgment can be rendered and appealed, if necessary.
That said, I am not sure why you believe that one cannot have a motion for reconsideration and appeal occurring at the same time. It is actually not uncommon for individuals to file both, and certainly one party filing one thing does not prohibit the other from filing the other.
A judgment that can be reconsidered is one that can be appealed. Both reconsideration and appeal are options for addressing an unfavorable judgment. A case is not considered undecided or not fully decided simply because a reconsideration is pending, quite the opposite. Now, you do bring up an interesting aspect of this, which is the court's discretion to decide which cases to review and when. This is not a matter of law, though, but a matter of discretion, which lawyers really have little control over.
As for conferences, they help establish deadlines and enable better documentation of any misconduct on the part of the judge or the other party. It is often difficult to 'prove' that the judge or the other party is 'dragging' out a case intentionally without them. By establishing that set deadlines have been unreasonably extended without good cause, there is a better chance of having the judge recused or having sanctions rendered against the other party.