Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Anglin v. Village of Washington Park

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


April 7, 2006

TANYA ANGLIN, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
VILLAGE OF WASHINGTON PARK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Clifford J. Proud U. S. Magistrate Judge

ORDER

PROUD, Magistrate Judge

Before he Court is the plaintiffs' motion for a 30-day extension of time to complete discovery. (Doc. 81). Plaintiffs need additional time to review the minutes of the March 6, 2006, Village Board meeting, prior to deposing Board members. Defendants object that plaintiffs have simply neglected to complete discovery and therefore do not warrant an extension of time. (Doc. 86). Plaintiffs filed an additional reply, noting that they moved to extend the discovery period prior to the scheduled close of discovery, and they go on to accuse defendants of untimely disclosures that have delayed discovery. (Doc. 87). Defendants would have the Court strike plaintiffs' reply as untimely. (Doc. 88).

As a preliminary matter, defendants motion to strike plaintiffs' reply as untimely (Doc. 88) is not well taken. Defendants have failed to include the three days allotted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(e). Plaintiffs' reply was timely filed.

Insofar as the parties would have the Court assess which side should bear the blame for discovery delays, the parties are raising issues that should have been raised by motion as the issues arose, but were not, and are now considered waived.

After consultation with United States District Judge Michael J. Reagn, it is agreed that a brief extension of discovery is warranted. However, the final pretrial conference and trial settings will not be amended.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants' motion to strike plaintiffs' reply to the subject motion for an extension of time (Doc. 88) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion for an extension of the discovery deadline (Doc. 81) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the pretrial schedule controlling this case is amended as follows:

1. All discovery shall be completed by April 15, 2006.

2. All dispositive motions shall be filed on or before April 28, 2006.

3. A settlement conference will be held before United States Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud on June 16, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., in the Federal Courthouse, East St. Louis, Illinois; settlement statements are due by June 6, 2006.

4. As previously set, a Final Pretrial Conference will be held before the trial judge on June 30, 2006, at 1:30 p.m.

5. As previously set, trial will commence on July 24, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20060407

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.