IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
March 30, 2007
MICHAEL R. STEINWAY AND PEGGY A. STEINWAY AND DAVID W. CROWELL, PLAINTIFFS,
THE VILLAGE OF PONTOON BEACH, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION; AND IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, VILLAGE OF PONTOON BEACH, ILLINOIS, POLICE CHIEF CHARLES LEUHMANN, PATROLMAN JOHN SIMMONS #062, AND LIEUTENANT DAN ABLE, #053, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, District Judge
In an effort of continuing case management, the Court notes that there are two pending Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 8 & 19) that have been filed by Defendants in this matter and, to date, it appears Plaintiffs have made no attempt to file a Response. Under CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7.1(c),"[f]ailure to timely file an answering brief to a motion may, in the court's discretion, be considered an admission of the merits of the motion." Accordingly, the Court allows Plaintiffs until Monday, April 16, 2007 to file their Responses to Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 8 & 19). If Plaintiffs do not file their Responses by this new deadline or fail to obtain a further extension of time to file from the Court, the Court, in its discretion pursuant to CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7.1(c), will deem this an admission of the merits of Defendants' Motions (Docs. 8 & 19) and thereby grant the Motions to Dismiss (unless, of course, it is patently clear from the record and applicable law that Defendants' arguments have absolutely no legal merit).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David R Herndon United States District Judge
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.