Hamilton County, IL et al v. Trinity Industries Inc. et al

Filing 179

ORDER STRIKING 178 Reply to Response to Motion filed by St. Clair County and Macon County, Illinois. See Order for details. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 5/3/17. (klh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS and
MACON COUNTY, ILLINOIS, individually and
on behalf of all other counties in the State of
Illinois,
Plaintiffs,
v.

No. 14-1320-DRH

TRINITY HIGHWAYS, INC. and
TRINITY HIGHWAY PRODUCTS, LLC,
Defendants.

ORDER

HERNDON, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court sua sponte for case management. On April
25, 2017, plaintiffs filed a reply to defendants’ response to their motion for
clarification (Doc. 178). A review of the reply reveals that it violates Local Rule
7.1(c) in that the reply does not set forth “circumstances” much less “exceptional
circumstances” as required by Local Rule 7.1(c). 1 Thus, the Court STRIKES the
reply brief (Doc. 178).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 3rd day of May, 2017.

Digitally signed by
Judge David R.
Herndon
Date: 2017.05.03
13:35:16 -05'00'
United States District Judge

1 Local Rule 7.1(c) provides in part: “Reply briefs are not favored and should be filed only in
exceptional circumstances. The party filing the reply brief should state the exceptional
circumstances.” Local Rule 7.1(c) (emphasis in original).