IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
July 27, 2009
ATLANTIC CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFF,
ADAM HARRIS, INC., D/B/A LENNY'S TAVERN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge
Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Enlargement of Time (Doc. 32) to reply to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21). Plaintiff filed the Motion for Summary Judgment on May 7, 2009. On May 27, 2009, Defendant filed a Motion for Extension of Time to respond to Plaintiff's Motion. (Doc. 22). The Court granted that Motion and allowed Plaintiff up to and including June 23, 2009 to file the Response. (Doc. 23). Two days after that due date, Defendant sought a second extension of time (Doc. 25), which the Court granted. (Doc. 26). Defendant's new due date to file a Response was July 8, 2009. Defendant filed the Response July 7, 2009 (Doc. 28). Per Local Rule 7.1(c), Plaintiff's Reply, if any, was due July 17, 2009. Instead, in a similar fashion to Defendant's belated second Motion for Extension of Time to file a Response brief, Plaintiff waited until three days after the Reply was due to file a Motion for Enlargement of Time (Doc. 32).
Reply briefs are not favored. S.D.ILL.R.7.1(c). Requests for additional time are also not favored, S.D.ILL.R.7.1(d), let alone requests for additional time filed after the due date of the brief for which the request seeks an extension. Both parties are advised that the local rules are to be heeded and that further late requests for additional time will be denied. That said, given the previous extensions of time granted and in light of the issues raised in Defendant's Response, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion. Plaintiff is ALLOWED up to and including August 4, 2009 to file its Reply to Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David R Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.