A district judge may review an interlocutory order of a prior judge in the same case for “cogent reasons and exceptional circumstances,” however, the prior judge’s order should be followed unless (1) the decision is clearly erroneous and its enforcement would work a manifest injustice, (2) intervening controlling authority makes reconsideration appropriate, or (3) substantially different evidence was adduced at a subsequent trial. To fit within the first category, the prior judge’s decision must not only be clearly erroneous, but it must also work a manifest injustice. Furthermore, when a successor district judge does revisit a prior order under one of these exceptions, he must state in the order the reasons for thinking the exception applies.