Berg v. Culhane et al

Filing 74

MOTION by Defendants Thomas Culhane, The Village of Oak Lawn for judgment Unopposed Rule 58(d) Motion Requesting the Entry of Judgment (Lemley, Brandon)

Berg v. Culhane et al

Doc. 74

51723-POG/LEM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION CHRISTOPHER BERG, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS CULHANE and THE VILLAGE OF OAK LAWN, Defendants. 09-C-5803 Judge Kendall

UNOPPOSED RULE 58(d) MOTION REQUESTING THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Defendants, Thomas Culhane and the Village of Oak Lawn, request that the judgment entered pursuant to Rule 58(d), and state as follows: 1. 2. the defense. 3. A minute order was entered on August 31, 2010, reading "MINUTE entry This case was tried to jury verdict on August 30-31, 2010. On August 31, 2010, the jury deliberated and returned a verdict in favor of

before Honorable Virgini M. Kendall: Jury trial held. Jury deliberations begin. Jury verdict entered in favor of defendant. Civil case terminated." Dkt. 54. 4. However, no judgment was entered as a separate document as required

by Rule 58(a). 5. 6. On September 30, 2010, Plaintiff timely filed a Notice of Appeal. Although the parties are in agreement that Plaintiff has timely appealed

from a final decision of the jury, some confusion lingers regarding appellate jurisdiction due to the lack of a judgment entered as a separate document.

Dockets.Justia.com

7. document. 8.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) requires that the judgment be set out in a separate

Under Rule 58(d) a party may request that judgment be set out in a

separate document if it has not been done as directed by Rule 58(b)(1) or (2). 9. On October 27, 2010, counsel for the defense conferred with Plaintiff's

counsel, Scott Kamin, regarding this motion, and he indicated that he had no opposition to it. 10. Accordingly, in order to preserve appellate jurisdiction and to prevent

future problems regarding appellate jurisdictions, the Defendants move to have the judgment be set out in a separate document, entering judgment in favor of the Defendants, Thomas Culhane and Village of Oak Lawn, pursuant to the jury's verdict. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Defendants move, without opposition, that the judgment be set out in a separate document. Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Brandon K. Lemley One of the Attorneys for Defendants Brandon K. Lemley QUERREY & HARROW, LTD. 175 W. Jackson, Ste. 1600 Chicago, IL 60604 312-540-7000

2

PROOF OF SERVICE The undersigned attorney certifies that on November 19, 2010, the foregoing document was served, pursuant to L.R. 5.9 and the General Order on Electronic Filing, via the Court's Electronic Case Filing System, to all parties of record. /s/ Brandon K. Lemley_________________ One of the Attorneys for Defendants Village of Oak Lawn and Thomas Culhane

3