Griffith v. Board of Education of Benton CCSD No. 47 et al, No. 4:2005cv04158 - Document 44 (S.D. Ill. 2006)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION, Granting 42 MOTION to Vacate filed by Board of Education of Benton CCSD No. 47. Vacating order 40 and Judgment 41. Case reopened. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 7/11/06. (bkl)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Griffith v. Board of Education of Benton CCSD No. 47 et al Case 4:05-cv-04158-JPG-DGW Doc. 44 Document 44 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS KELLIE GRIFFITH, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF BENTON COMMUNITY CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 47, NORMAN CARLILE, DAVID AUTEN, JOHN METZGER, DAVE SEVERIN, GARY MESSERSMITH, KATHLEEN KERLEY, JAMES TALLEY, RICK COOK, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Case No: 05-CV-4158-JPG MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the motion to vacate judgment filed by defendant Board of Education of Benton Community Consolidated School District No. 47 ( Board of Education ) (Doc. 42). The Court construes the motion as pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) based on the Court s premature ruling on the plaintiff s motion to voluntarily dismiss her remaining claims without prejudice. The plaintiff filed her motion to voluntarily dismiss Count 1 against the Board of Education on June 5, 2006. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c), the Board of Education had 30 days to respond to the motion, which would have established a deadline of July 5, 2006, under the counting rules in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(a). Believing that this was the appropriate response period and not heeding the correct response deadline included in the plaintiff s docket entry for its motion, the Court ruled on the plaintiff s motion on July 6. The Court had forgotten, however, about Rule 6(e), which adds an additional three days to a response period when that period is triggered by the service of a paper. Thus, the Board of Education actually had three more days, up to and including July 10, to respond to the plaintiff s motion. The Court s ruling Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:05-cv-04158-JPG-DGW Document 44 Filed 07/11/2006 Page 2 of 2 was premature, and the Board of Education s response filed July 7 was timely. For this reason, the Court VACATES its order of July 6, 2006 (Doc. 40) and the judgment (Doc. 41) and REINSTATES this case. The Court will consider the Board of Education s timely filed response, to which the plaintiff may reply in accordance with Local Rule 7.1(c). Entered this 11th day of July, 2006. s/ J. Phil Gilbert JUDGE J. PHIL GILBERT
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
