Dupont v. Freight Feeder Aircraft Corporation, Inc., 13-cv-256-JPG-DGW. (2016)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20160428979
Visitors: 12
Filed: Apr. 27, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 27, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the motion filed by plaintiffs John J. Dupont and Randy Mosely for summary judgment on Count 1 of the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 103). Count 1 is a breach of contract claim against defendant Freight Feeder Aircraft Corporation ("Freight Feeder"). In this litigation, Freight Feeder has been served with process and has appeared, but counsel has withdrawn and no new counsel has appeared. The plai
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the motion filed by plaintiffs John J. Dupont and Randy Mosely for summary judgment on Count 1 of the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 103). Count 1 is a breach of contract claim against defendant Freight Feeder Aircraft Corporation ("Freight Feeder"). In this litigation, Freight Feeder has been served with process and has appeared, but counsel has withdrawn and no new counsel has appeared. The plain..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on the motion filed by plaintiffs John J. Dupont and Randy Mosely for summary judgment on Count 1 of the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 103). Count 1 is a breach of contract claim against defendant Freight Feeder Aircraft Corporation ("Freight Feeder"). In this litigation, Freight Feeder has been served with process and has appeared, but counsel has withdrawn and no new counsel has appeared. The plaintiffs served their summary judgment motion on Freight Feeder's chief executive officer, but Freight Feeder has not responded to the motion. In light of Freight Feeder's failure to appear through counsel and failure to respond to the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, the Court finds it appropriate to construe the failure to respond to the motion as an admission of the merits of the motion pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion for summary judgment (Doc. 103) and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment on Count 1 in favor of the plaintiffs and against Freight Feeder at the close of this case. There remains outstanding the question of the amount of the judgment that should be entered against Freight Feeder. The Court ORDERS that the plaintiffs shall have up to and including May 13, 2016, to submit proof of their damages from Freight Feeder's breach. The Court further VACATES the final pretrial conference and trial dates in light of the foregoing disposition of the only remaining claim in this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle