The trial court correctly denied defendant’s motion for reconsideration of its order granting the judgment creditor the right to execute on defendants’ IRA and ERISA plan interest because the motion failed to cite new facts or law. However, the trial court then properly exercised its inherent authority to reconsider its order because the reconsideration motion brought to its attention the fact that it had not considered the effect of ERISA’s anti-assignment provision. The trial court retained jurisdiction to reconsider the order, even though it was appealable, because the time to appeal had not expired before the trial court indicated that it would reconsider the order.