Campbell v. Bortz Health Care

Filing 27

ORDER re 26 Request filed by Emma Campbell. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (GWil)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION EMMA CAMPBELL, Plaintiff, v. BORTZ HEALTH CARE OF OAKLAND, Defendant. / ORDER Plaintiff Emma Campbell, who is pursuing this action without an attorney, has filed a handwritten letter [Docket #26], requesting a further extension of time to "complete exhibits" in response to Defendant's motion for summary judgment. On March 23, 2009, she filed a number of written exhibits in response. See Docket #24. The Defendant filed a brief in response on April 1, 2009. See Docket #25. In the present motion, Plaintiff states that she is attending her sister's funeral in Alabama, and will not return until May 1, 2009. The Court understands that Ms. Campbell is proceeding without an attorney, and appreciates the importance of giving her a full and fair hearing. At the same time, the Defendant has a right to a timely disposition of this case, and even persons who are not represented by an attorney must comply with the schedules set by the Court. -1- No. 08-12035 District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen Balancing these factors, the Court will give the Plaintiff a short extension of time to file additional exhibits and/or arguments. The Plaintiff's motion for extension [Docket #26] is GRANTED. Plaintiff may file additional exhibits and/or arguments no later than MAY 15, 2009. NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED. SO ORDERED. S/R. Steven Whalen R. STEVEN WHALEN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Dated: April 27, 2009 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served on the attorneys and/or parties of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on April 27, 2009. S/Gina Wilson Judicial Assistant -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?