Hill v. United States of America

Filing 15

ORDER Requiring Clarification ( Responses due by 10/4/2013) Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

DOUGLAS HILL,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 13-11713

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
/
ORDER REQUIRING CLARIFICATION
On October 3, 2013, the parties submitted a proposed stipulated order staying
the case and adjourning all deadlines for 30 days because the appropriations act that
had been funding the Department of Justice (DOJ) lapsed. The proposed order states
that, “absent an appropriation, most [DOJ] attorneys involved in civil litigations are
prohibited from working, even on a voluntary basis, except in very limited
circumstances.” However, Defendant does not say whether the attorney responsible for
this case has been, or is about to be, furloughed.
According to the DOJ Contingency Plan, found on the Department’s home page:
Civil litigation will be curtailed or postponed to the extent that this can be
done without compromising to a significant degree the safety of human life
or the protection of property. Litigators will need to approach the courts and
request that active cases, except for those in which postponement would
compromise to a significant degree the safety of human life or the protection
of property, be postponed until funding is available. If a court denies such a
request and orders a case to continue, the government will comply with the
court’s order, which would constitute express legal authorization for the
activity to continue. The Department will limit its civil litigation staffing to the
minimum level needed to comply with the court’s order and to protect life and
property.

U.S. Department of Justice FY 2014 Contingency Plan, www.justice.gov, http://
www.justice.gov/ jmd/ publications/ doj-contingency-plan.pdf (last visited Oct. 2, 2013)
(emphasis added) (the rendering of this URL contains spaces). Assuming the abovequoted language governs this matter, it appears that a court order will result in
continuation of the case without delay. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant is DIRECTED to file a statement of clarification
not later than October 4, 2013, addressing the following questions:
(1)

Has the attorney responsible for this case been furloughed?

(2)

Does the DOJ Contingency Plan language quoted above govern this
matter? If the language governs, does Defendant dispute the court’s
interpretation? If Defendant contends that another source of authority
governs this matter, Defendant is advised to include it in its statement of
clarification.

s/Robert H. Cleland
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: October 3, 2013

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record
on this date, October 3, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Lisa Wagner
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
[phone]

S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C1 ORDERS\13-11713.HILL.OrderRequiringClarification.rljr.wpd

2