Elawyers Elawyers

McNEAL v. TATE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, 2:70-CV-00029-DMB. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. Mississippi Number: infdco20170120b64 Visitors: 13
Filed: Jan. 19, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 19, 2017
Summary: ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION DEBRA M. BROWN , District Judge . On December 7, 2016, this Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order which, among other things, directed the Tate County School District to pay the plaintiffs' attorney's fees and costs associated with bringing the plaintiffs' "Motion for Further Relief Pursuant to Desegregation Order, and to Compel Defendants to Reinstitute Sports and Extracurricular Activities at Coldwater Attendance Center High School" and "Motion for Suppleme
More

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION

On December 7, 2016, this Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order which, among other things, directed the Tate County School District to pay the plaintiffs' attorney's fees and costs associated with bringing the plaintiffs' "Motion for Further Relief Pursuant to Desegregation Order, and to Compel Defendants to Reinstitute Sports and Extracurricular Activities at Coldwater Attendance Center High School" and "Motion for Supplemental Relief Pursuant to Desegregation Order, and to Compel Defendants to File Supplemental Reports Report [sic] That Are in Compliance with the August 4, 1970 Desegregation Order." The order provided the plaintiffs fourteen days to submit notices "setting forth their costs and reasonable attorney's fees" associated with the various motions.

On December 30, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a motion to extend the deadline to submit their notices. Doc. #102. The motion and accompanying memorandum, which do not specify a period of extension, argue that an extension is required because the typist for plaintiffs' counsel recently passed away and the typist's replacement was unable to perform the work required. Id; Doc. #103. The District has not responded to the plaintiffs' motion and the time within which it could have done so has expired.

Pursuant to this Court's local rules, "[i]f a party fails to respond to any motion, other than a dispositive motion, within the time allotted, the court may grant the motion as unopposed." L.U. Civ. R. 7(b)(3)(E). Because the District has not responded to the plaintiffs' motion for extension, the motion [102] is GRANTED as unopposed. The plaintiffs' may file their notices of attorney's fees and costs on or before January 26, 2017.

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer