A federal judge has denied a motion for reconsideration after granting summary judgment to Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc., which had claimed it should not be held liable for a guest injured in dangerous surf conditions on hotel property.

Chief Judge Stefan Underhill of the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut found against Massachusetts resident Peter Alpert, who had sued Starwood and Sheraton Overseas Management.

Alpert sustained a spinal cord injury while swimming in the beach on the property of the Sheraton Hacienda del Mar Resort, a luxury hotel in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. The Sheraton is a wholly owned subsidiary of Stamford-headquartered Starwood.

Alpert, who was on vacation at the time of the December 2012 incident, said in his lawsuit the hotel had an extensive beachfront with multiple accesses to the beach. He said the company encouraged guests to go to the beach, and provided umbrellas, chairs and sports equipment along the beach.

Alpert's lawsuit said he had walked about 10 feet past the water line when he hit a sharp drop-off on the waterfront.

“Suddenly and without warning, Peter Alpert was struck by a large wave that lifted him up, turned him around, and pushed his face into the beach,” the lawsuit said. “His neck snapped back due to the force, causing severe spinal cord injury.”

Alpert suffered multiple herniated discs, permanent loss of fine motor coordination in his hands and feet and blunt trauma to the head, cranial and cervical spine.

The lawsuit said there was no lifeguard on duty and no warning signs indicating dangerous surf conditions.

But the judge sided with the hotel companies, which argued for dismissal based on alleged forum non conveniens, failure to state a claim for premises liability and failure to add necessary and indispensable parties.

After Underhill granted summary judgment for the defendants, attorneys for Alpert filed a motion for reconsideration. But on Monday, Underhill upheld his motion for summary judgment.

“The threshold issue was whether Mexican or Connecticut tort law should apply,” Underhill wrote. “I concluded that Mexican law applied, and that the plaintiffs failed to meet the 'direct and immediate consequence' standard for causation under Mexican law.”

In their motion for reconsideration, the plaintiffs argued Underhill's summary judgment ruling “failed to properly take into account the interests of the plaintiff's domicile, Massachusetts.”  They also argued the judge erroneously treated Starwood as a Mexican domiciliary.

But Underhill disagreed, finding the challengers did not meet the standard for reconsideration.

“In this case, the plaintiffs cannot point to controlling decisions or data that I overlooked,” he wrote. “Because there is no intervening change of controlling law, there is no new evidence, and there is no need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice, plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is denied.”

Representing Alpert and his wife, Rebecca Drill, are attorneys Lewis Chimes and Mary-Kate Georgette Smith, with Stamford-based Law Office of Lewis Chimes. Chimes did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday and Smith, who was out due to a death in the family, was not available for comment.

Representing the defendants are attorneys Tyler Humphrey and Eric Niederer, with Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker. Niederer declined to comment for this report and Humphrey did not respond to a request for comment.