Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee grants Plaintiffs’ motion to strike Defendants’ 44-page summary judgment reply for violating the applicable page limits under Local Rule 7.1. The Court concludes that its prior page-limit extensions applied to opening and responsive briefs, not reply briefs, and permits Defendants to refile a compliant reply within seven days.
Holdings
- Defendants' 44-page reply violated the Local Rules because the Court authorized 40 pages for opening and responsive briefs but did not authorize 40 pages for reply briefs.
- The Court has discretion to enforce its Local Rules and, under the circumstances presented, striking Defendants' reply was appropriate.
Questions Presented
- Whether Defendants' 44-page reply violated the applicable page limits under E.D. Tenn. Local Rule 7.1 and the Court's orders.
- Whether striking the noncompliant reply was an appropriate exercise of the Court's discretion.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (11)
- Hollingsworth v. Perry, 558 U.S. 183, 191 (2010)(followed)
- Weil v. Neary, 278 U.S. 160, 169 (1929)(followed)
- Romine v. Uber Techs., Inc., No. 3:16-CV-371, 2017 WL 11494685, at *1 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 23, 2017)(followed)
- Springfield v. Centene Corp., No. 2:20-CV-02857, 2022 WL 23029318, at *1 (W.D. Tenn. Oct. 28, 2022)(followed)
- Pearce v. Chrysler Grp., L.L.C. Pension Plan, 615 F. App’x 342, 349–50 (6th Cir. 2015)(followed)
- Valassis Commc’ns, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 97 F.3d 870, 873 (6th Cir. 1996)(followed)
- SmartBank v. Cartron, No. 4:19-CV-00062, 2020 WL 1897168, at *4 (E.D. Tenn. Apr. 16, 2020)(followed)
- United States v. Ball, No. 06-CR-20465, 2023 WL 1795703, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 7, 2023)(followed)
- Salehpour v. Univ. of Tennessee, 159 F.3d 199, 205 (6th Cir. 1998)(distinguished)
- Nam v. U.S. Xpress, Inc., No. 1:11-CV-116, 2012 WL 10161528, at *2 (E.D. Tenn. June 25, 2012)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 11.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…