Helmert et al v. Butterball LLC

Filing 203

ORDER denying 187 Butterball's Motion to Strike; the Motion for Leave to File a Sur-Response is granted; any additional sur-response must be filed within 7 days from the entry of this Order. Signed by Chief Judge J. Leon Holmes on 5/13/10. (vjt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION SHEILA HELMERT, WILMA BROWN, and LORI WEST, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. BUTTERBALL, LLC ORDER Butterball, LLC, has filed a motion to strike or in the alternative a motion to file a surresponse. That motion is directed at a brief filed by the plaintiffs in support of their motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. When the motion was filed, the plaintiffs did not file a brief in support. After Butterball had filed a brief opposing the motion, the plaintiffs then filed a brief in support of the motion. The plaintiffs do not oppose the motion for leave to file a sur-response. The motion to strike is DENIED. The motion for leave to file a sur-response is GRANTED. Document #187. Any sur-response in addition to the one filed yesterday that Butterball wishes to file must be filed within seven days from the entry of this Order.1 IT IS SO ORDERED this 13th day of May, 2010. No. 4:08CV00342 JLH DEFENDANT PLAINTIFFS

___________________________________ J. LEON HOLMES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The plaintiffs have submitted an affidavit from one of their lawyers saying that he told one of the Court's clerks in a telephone conversation that plaintiffs would be filing a reply and that the clerk responded that she would be looking for it. Nothing is inappropriate in a lawyer notifying a law clerk that a document will be filed, nor is it inappropriate for the clerk to say that she would be looking for it. It is disturbing, however, that the plaintiffs present this ex parte conversation as advice from chambers or a ruling by the Court. It would be inappropriate for court staff to give advice to a party or to offer an opinion about how the Court would rule.
1