Walker v. Nissan North America, Inc. et al
Filing
9
ORDER and REASONS granting 7 Motion to Dismiss Party, Eric Hill Automotive, LLC for Failure to State a Claim, as stated within document. Signed by Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt on 2/6/2013. (cbs)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
DORIS WALKER
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NO. 12-2501
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC.
SECTION “N” (3)
ORDER AND REASONS
Local Rule 7.5 of the Eastern District of Louisiana requires that a memorandum in
opposition to a motion be filed eight days prior to the noticed submission date. No memorandum
in opposition to the following motion, noticed for submission on February 6, 2013, was filed:
“12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss” (Rec. Doc. 7), filed by Eric Hill
Automotive, L.L.C. d/b/a Eric Hill Nissan.
Further, the Court finds that the motion has merit. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the above motion is hereby GRANTED, and the plaintiffs’
claims against Eric Hill Automotive, L.L.C. d/b/a Eric Hill Nissan are hereby DISMISSED.
A motion for reconsideration of this Order, if any, must be filed within twenty-eight days
of the date this Order is entered by the Clerk of Court. The motion must be accompanied by
opposition memorandum to the original motion. Because a motion for reconsideration would not
have been necessary had a timely opposition memorandum been filed, the costs incurred in
connection with the motion, including attorneys' fees, will be assessed against the party moving
for reconsideration. See FED. R. CIV. P. 16, 83. A statement of costs conforming to Local Rule
54.3 shall be submitted by all parties desiring to be awarded costs and attorneys’ fees no later
than eight days prior to the hearing on the motion for reconsideration.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 6th day of February, 2013.
______________________________________
KURT D. ENGELHARDT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?