IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
June 16, 2010
REGINALD PITTMAN, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND, ROBIN M. HAMILTON, PLAINTIFF,
COUNTY OF MADISON, STATE OF ILLINOIS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge
Now before the Court is Defendants' motion for extension of time to file reply brief (Doc. 61). Specifically, Defendant's counsels states that they need more time to prepare a reply to Plaintiff's response to the motion for summary judgment due to the detailed issues involved. Local Rule 7.1 (c) states in part:
Reply briefs are not favored and should be filed only in exceptional circumstances. The party filing the reply brief shall state the exceptional circumstances.
Here, Defendants' motion for extension of time to file reply brief does not state the exceptional circumstances as to why a reply brief is needed. Thus, the Court DENIES the motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David R Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.