Hale et al v. Bayer Corporation et al

Filing 54

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, Defendants' Motion (Doc. 53 ) for Relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) is GRANTED. The Court's Memorandum and Order of April 21, 2017 is amended to reflect dismissal with prejudice and the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter an amended judgment to reflect dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 6/6/2017. (jdh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
KENNETH HALE and VIKI HALE,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiffs,
vs.
BAYER CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-00745-JPG-SCW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ Motion (Doc. 53) for Relief pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a). Plaintiffs have not filed a response and the time for doing
so has expired.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) provides that, “[t]he court may correct a clerical
mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or omission whenever one is found in a judgment” as
long as an appeal has not been docketed. Defendants were granted summary judgment on April
21, 2017 and the dismissal was without prejudice. The Defendants move the Court to correct the
dismissal to reflect dismissal with prejudice.
Inadvertently designating a dismissal as being “without prejudice” instead of
“with prejudice” is the type of rote, typographical error of transcription that could
be committed by a law clerk or a judicial assistant. It is not an error of judgment
or legal reasoning, as no chain of legal reasoning could possibly lead a court to
conclude that summary judgment should be granted without prejudice. Indeed, the
very concept of granting summary judgment without prejudice is internally
incoherent. . . . Rule 60(a) authorizes a district court to modify a judgment so that
the judgment reflects the ‘necessary implications of the court's decision,’ and a
motion for summary judgment “is necessarily granted with prejudice.”
Rivera v. PNS Stores, Inc., 647 F.3d 188, 194–95 (5th Cir. 2011).

Page 1 of 2

Summary judgment is a dismissal on the merits and should therefore be a dismissal with
prejudice. As such, the Court finds that the dismissal without prejudice was a mistake arising
from oversight.
An appeal has not been docketed. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion (Doc. 53) for Relief
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) is GRANTED. The Court’s Memorandum
and Order of April 21, 2017 is amended to reflect dismissal with prejudice and the Clerk of
Court is DIRECTED to enter an amended judgment to reflect dismissal with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 6/6/2017
s/J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2