IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
June 11, 2008
CARL E. WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF,
THOMAS M. SCHRAM AND FOODLINER, INC., D/B/A QUEST LOGISTICS, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge
This matter comes before the Court for docket control. A hearing on motions for sanctions is set for Thursday, June 12, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. In preparing for this hearing, it has come to the Court's attention that several supplemental pleadings have been filed without leave of Court. Pursuant to FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 15(d) supplemental pleadings may only be filed after a party has filed a motion to supplement pleadings and the Court has granted such motion. Plaintiff has filed multiple supplemental pleadings without leave from the Court. (See Docs. 96, 97, 99, 103, 120, and 121.) Since Plaintiff filed these supplemental pleadings without leave from the Court, the Court STRIKES the documents. In the future, if Plaintiff wishes to file a supplemental pleading, Plaintiff should first file a motion for leave to file a supplement and wait for the Court's ruling before proceeding. The motion should explain why such a supplement is necessary. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d). Instead of also filing the proposed document instanter, the Court directs Plaintiff to e-mail the proposed document(s) to its Chambers e-mail address at DRHpd@ilsd.uscourts.gov for review, and then Plaintiff will later be allowed to file the document if the motion for leave to file is granted. SeeSection 2.10 of the CM/ECF User's Manual.
Prior to the upcoming hearing, the Court wishes to impress upon counsel for all parties that the Court does not look fondly upon conduct that contravenes either the Local Rules of the Southern District of Illinois or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These rules are in place to minimize conflicts such as those pending before the Court, which have the potential to devour valuable Court resources. Blatant disregard of the rules is unacceptable. Furthermore, personal attacks are unprofessional and will not be tolerated by the Court. That said, even lawyers are human and prone to err on occasion. Attorneys should not gleefully seize upon every mistake made by opposing counsel. The Court advises counsel to consider these admonishments prior to the hearing on June 12, 2008.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David R Herndon United States District Court Chief Judge
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.