Nelson v. Russell County Board of Education et al

Filing 82

OPINION AND ORDER that plaintiff Gerald B. Nelson, III's 76 motion for extension of time and 77 and 78 motions to consolidate pending motions are granted to the following extent: (1) Plaintiff Nelson has until April 13, 2012, to respond to motions for summary judgment (Doc. Nos. 57 , 59 & 61 ), on the condition that plaintiff Nelson's counsel pay 50 % of the reasonable attorney's fees and expenses that defendants Russell County, WVTM Channel 9, and Ramsey have incur red in connection with the extension motion; (2) If plaintiff Nelson files a timely summary-judgment response pursuant to the extension allowed by this order, defendants are allowed until April 20, 2012, to file a summary-judgment reply; (3) said fee s and expenses must be paid by plaintiff Nelson's counsel and are not to be borne by plaintiff Nelson himself; (4) Plaintiff Nelson's counsel has until April 13, 2012, to file a notice in this court accepting the extension terms of this ord er, otherwise, plaintiff Nelson is not allowed additional time; (5) If plaintiff Nelson files a timely notice of acceptance of the extension terms said defendants are allowed until April 20, 2012, to file a motion for reasonable attorney's fees and expenses; (6) Nothing in this order affects the deadlines outlined in 73 second scheduling order as to defendant Yvette Richardson's 70 motion for summary judgment. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 4/12/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(cc, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

GERALD B. NELSON, III,
Plaintiff,
v.
RUSSELL COUNTY BOARD OF
EDUCATION, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
3:10cv1005-MHT
(WO)

OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Gerald B. Nelson, III, brings this lawsuit
against defendants Russell County Board of Education,
WVTM Channel 9, Lalanya Ramsey, and Yvette Richardson
alleging numerous constitutional violations and state
torts.

The case is now before the court on Nelson’s

motions for an extension of time to file his response to
motions for summary judgment filed by three of the four
defendants.

For the reasons that follow, the court will

conditionally grant Nelson’s motions.
Three defendants–-the school board, Channel 9, and
Ramsey–-separately moved for summary judgment in early

March.

On March 12, this court issued an order requiring

any response to these three summary-judgment motions to
be filed by March 27.

Nelson’s counsel missed the March

27 deadline, and, on April 5, belatedly filed a motion to
extend time for her response.
later

motions,

Nelson’s

In the April 5 motion and

counsel

requests

that

her

response be filed by April 13, the same day as her
response is due on a fourth summary-judgment motion,
filed by defendant Richardson.
Paragraph 15(B) of the court’s uniform scheduling
order

provides

unavoidable
movant,

...

that,

“Absent

circumstances
‘eleventh

stated

beyond

hour’

the

unforeseen
control

extension

motions will be denied outright.”

and

of

the

requests

and

Order (doc. no. 44).

Nelson’s extension motions are worse than an eleventhhour motion (which, under the uniform scheduling order,
is

due

to

be

denied

outright

absent

an

acceptable

explanation), for they come more than one week after the
deadline.

2

Nevertheless, Nelson’s counsel contends that she is
still entitled to an extension.

At one point, during an

on-the-record conference call held on April 6, 2012,
Nelson’s counsel explained that her solo law practice
recently merged with another firm and that, during the
transition

period,

secretarial

staff

unfamiliar

with

practice in federal court improperly entered the due date
on Nelson’s response to the school board’s, Channel 9's,
and Ramsey’s summary-judgment motions as April 13, the
due date for Nelson’s response on Richardson’s summaryjudgment motion.

At another point Nelson’s counsel said

that she was involved in a serious car accident in
January 2012 and suffered multiple broken bones and a
severe neck injury.

Eventually, Nelson’s counsel argued

that it was the combined effect of these two incidents
that caused her to miss the March 27 deadline.
Aside from the fact that Nelson’s counsel changed her
reason for her delay, she provided no reason for her
failure to bring to the court’s attention, in January,

3

February, or early March, that she had had an accident
and would not be able to give her full attention to this
case.

If she was able to manage the merger of her office

with another law firm during this time, she was able to
notify the court of the alleged effect of her accident on
her

law

practice.

The

court

is

convinced

that

inexcusable inattention played, at least, some part in
her delay.*
Nonetheless, because there will be no real prejudice
to the school board, Channel 9, and Ramsey, the court
finds that some extension is justified so that Nelson
will not be left out of court due to the inattention of
his attorney.

The court is therefore persuaded that an

extension of time until April 13, 2012, is warranted,
albeit only conditionally.

*

While not the basis for the decision in this case,
the court notes that Nelson’s counsel has missed
deadlines in other cases.
See Horn v. Russell County
Board of Eduction, civil action 3:09cv624-MHT (M.D.
Ala.), and Belton v. Russell County Board of Eduction,
civil action 3:10cv814-MHT.
4

*
For

the

foregoing

*

*

reasons,

it

is

ORDERED

that

plaintiff Gerald B. Nelson, III’s motions for extension
of time (Doc. No. 76) and to consolidate pending motions
(Doc. Nos. 77 & 78) are granted to the following extent:
(1) Plaintiff Nelson has until April 13, 2012, to
respond

to

Education’s,

defendants
WVTM

Russell

Channel

9's,

County

and

Lalanya

Board

of

Ramsey’s

motions for summary judgment (Doc. Nos. 57, 59 & 61), on
the condition that plaintiff Nelson’s counsel pay 50 % of
the

reasonable

attorney’s

fees

and

expenses

that

defendants Russell County, WVTM Channel 9, and Ramsey
have incurred in connection with the extension motion.
(2) If plaintiff Nelson files a timely summaryjudgment response pursuant to the extension allowed by
this order, defendants Russell County, WVTM Channel 9,
and Ramsey are allowed until April 20, 2012, to file a
summary-judgment reply.

5

(3) The above-referenced fees and expenses must be
paid by plaintiff Nelson’s counsel and are not to be
borne by plaintiff Nelson himself.
(4) Plaintiff Nelson’s counsel has until April 13,
2012, to file a notice in this court accepting the
extension

terms

of

this

order;

otherwise,

plaintiff

Nelson is not allowed additional time to respond to the
motions for summary judgment filed by defendants Russell
County, WVTM Channel 9, and Ramsey (Doc. Nos. 57, 59 &
61).
(5) If plaintiff Nelson files a timely notice of
acceptance

of

the

extension

terms

of

this

order,

defendants Russell County, WVTM Channel 9, and Ramsey are
allowed until April 20, 2012, to file a motion for
reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses pursuant to this
order.
(6) Nothing in this order affects the deadlines
outlined in the second scheduling order (Doc. No. 73) as

6

to

defendant

Yvette

Richardson’s

motion

for

summary

judgment (Doc. No. 70).
DONE, this the 12th day of April, 2012.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE