Rigsby v. Shawneetown Harbor Service, Inc.

Filing 40

ORDER AFFIRMING Magistrate Judge Williams' Orders and DENYING the 39 APPEAL OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE DECISION to District Court by Bill Rigsby re 34 Motion Hearing, Set Hearings and 35 Order on Motion to Quash filed by Bill Rigsby. See Order for details. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 2/3/15. (klh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
BILL RIGSBY,
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant
v.

No. 14-0676-DRH

SHAWNEETOWN HARBOR SERVICE
INC.,
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff
AND
INDUSTRIAL MARINE SERVICES
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM and ORDER

HERNDON, District Judge:
Pending before the Court is plaintiff’s review and appeal of Magistrate Judge
Williams’ Orders or Recommendations pursuant to United States District Court
Southern Illinois District of Illinois Local Rules (Doc. 39). Specifically, plaintiff
appeals two January 22, 2015 Orders issued by Magistrate Judge Williams (Docs.
34 & 35) arguing that “[w]hile plaintiff initially consented to the appointment of a
magistrate judge, defendant has yet to file with this court its voluntary consent to a
magistrate judge. Without such consent by all parties, a magistrate judge has no
authority to conduct any proceeding in this, or any other, civil case.” (Doc. 39, p. 2).
Plaintiff further argues that the any orders entered by Magistrate Judge Williams
Page 1 of 4

should be held moot due to the fact that not all parties had agreed to the consent of
the magistrate judge’s appointment.

Based on the following, the Court affirms

Magistrate Judge Williams’ January 22, 2015 Orders and denies plaintiff’s review
and appeal. 1
Local Rule 73.1(a) of the Southern District of Illinois provides:
(a)
Appeal of Non-Dispostive Matters – 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(A)
Any party may appeal a Magistrate Judge’s order
determining a motion or matter within 14 days after issuance of a
Magistrate Judge’s order, unless a different time is prescribed by the
Magistrate Judge or a District Judge. The party shall file with the
Clerk of the Court and serve on all parties a written request for an
appeal which shall specifically designate the order or part of the order
that the parties wish the Court to reconsider. A District Judge shall
reconsider the matter and shall set aside any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s order found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to the law. A
District Judge may also reconsider sua sponte any matter determined
by a Magistrate Judge under this rule.
Also, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), the Court may modify or
reverse a magistrate judge on a non-dispostive issue upon a showing that the
magistrate judge’s decision is “clearly erroneous or contrary to the law.”
Specifically, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a) provides:
Nondispositive Matters. When a pretrial matter not dispositive
of a party’s claim or defense is referred to a magistrate judge to hear
and decide, the magistrate judge must promptly conduct the required
proceedings, and when appropriate, issue a written order stating the
decision. A party may serve and file objections to the order within 14
days after being served with a copy. A party may not assign as error a
defect in the order not timely objected to. The district judge in the case
must consider timely objections and modify or set aside any part of the
order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to the law.
1 The Court does not need a response from the other parties to address this review and appeal.

Page 2 of 4

A finding is clearly erroneous when “the reviewing court on the entire evidence is
left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
Anderson v. City of Bessemer, 470 U.S. 564, 573 (1985)(quoting United States v.
United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948); See also Weeks v. Samsung
Heavy Industries Co. Ltd., 126 F.3d 926, 943 (7th Cir. 1997)(“The clear error
standard means that the district court can overturn the magistrate judge’s ruling
only if the district court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake
has been made.”).
Here, plaintiff’s review and appeal misses the mark. The civil cases in this
judicial district are automatically referred to the magistrate judges of this
judicial district for non-dispositive matters.

Local Rule 72.1(a)(1) of the

Southern District of Illinois provides:
(a) Automatic References
The Clerk of the Court shall refer the following matters to
a Magistrate Judge upon filing:
(1) all pretrial motions for hearing and determination in
accordance the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, with
the exception of motions for injunctive relief, for judgment on the
pleadings, for summary judgment, to dismiss, to remand, to permit
maintenance of a class action, to dismiss for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, to involuntarily dismiss an action,
motions in limine regarding evidentiary matters, and for extensions of
time with regard to matters pending before a District Judge. Upon
entry of a pretrial order, all motions thereafter served shall be
submitted to the assigned trial judge;
The consent that plaintiff raises in his review and appeal is a complete referral of
the case to magistrate judge after consent of all the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
Page 3 of 4

§ 636(c) and Local Rule 72.2 of the Southern District of Illinois.

Clearly, it was

proper for Magistrate Williams to issue the January 22, 2015 Orders on the
non-dispositive issues.

Magistrate Williams’ January 22, 2015 Memorandum

and Order is well written and clearly sets out the reasons for his ruling.
Further, the Court finds that plaintiff has not established that Magistrate
Williams’ Orders were clearly erroneous or contrary to the law. There is no
reason for this Court to vacate Judge Williams’ Orders.
Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge Williams’ January 22,
2015 Orders (Docs. 34 & 35) and DENIES plaintiff’s review and appeal of
Magistrate Judge Williams’ Orders (Doc. 39).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 3rd day of February, 2015.

Digitally signed by
David R. Herndon
Date: 2015.02.03
16:22:19 -06'00'

United States District Judge

Page 4 of 4