Walters et al v. Flint et al

Filing 953

ORDER terminating 885 Motion for Judgment; 886 Motion for Judgment; and 890 Motion for Directed Verdict. Signed by District Judge Judith E. Levy. (WBar)

Case 5:17-cv-10164-JEL-KGA ECF No. 953, PageID.69320 Filed 09/14/22 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
Sherrod, Teed, Vanderhagen and Case No. 5:17-cv-10164-JELWare,
KGA
Plaintiffs,
v.

Hon. Judith E. Levy
Flint Water Cases Bellwether I

VNA and LAN,
Defendants.
_________________________________ /
ORDER TERMINATING POST-TRIAL MOTIONS
AS MOOT [885, 886, 890]
On July 19, 2022, after the close of evidence in the Bellwether I
trial, Defendants VNA and LAN filed motions for judgment under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50. (ECF Nos. 885, 886.) On July 20,
2022, closing arguments began. Also on July 20, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a
motion for directed verdict. (ECF No. 890.)
On the record on July 21, 2022, the Court acknowledged receiving
the parties’ motions, stating: “I will take those under advisement, await
the jury’s verdict, and then work my way through them. So unless I hear
otherwise from all of you, the briefing will follow the local rules on a

Case 5:17-cv-10164-JEL-KGA ECF No. 953, PageID.69321 Filed 09/14/22 Page 2 of 4

dispositive motion.” (ECF No. 914, PageID.68916 (Tr. July 21, 2022;
pp.7762).)
On August 9, 2022, the parties filed a stipulation regarding the
briefing of their motions. (ECF No. 903, PageID.54557.) In their
stipulation, the parties stated:
Because the Court has submitted the case to the jury, the
Parties agree— without waiving their right to be heard on the
legal questions raised in the JMOL Motions—that responsive
briefs on these motions will not be filed at this time.
The Parties may renew their arguments that they are entitled
to judgment as a matter of law by filing motions under FRCP
50(b), which may be combined with motions under FRCP 59,
under a briefing schedule provided for by the Rules or agreed
to by the Parties and approved by the Court.
(Id. at PageID.54558.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) states:
If the court does not grant a motion for judgment as a matter
of law made under Rule 50(a), the court is considered to have
submitted the action to the jury subject to the court's later
deciding the legal questions raised by the motion. No later
than 28 days after the entry of judgment—or if the motion
addresses a jury issue not decided by a verdict, no later than
28 days after the jury was discharged—the movant may file a
renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and may

2

Case 5:17-cv-10164-JEL-KGA ECF No. 953, PageID.69322 Filed 09/14/22 Page 3 of 4

include an alternative or joint request for a new trial under
Rule 59.1
Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) (emphasis added).
A mistrial was declared in this case on August 11, 2022 and the jury
was discharged on the same day. (See Case No. 17-10164, Minute Entry,
dated August 11, 2022.) Twenty-eight days after August 11, 2022 was
September 9, 2022. The parties did not file renewed motions before
September 9, 2022, or otherwise stipulate to or seek an extension for the
time to file such a motion. Accordingly, the motions are moot. The Court
orders that the motions be terminated because they are no longer
pending.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 14, 2022
Ann Arbor, Michigan

s/Judith E. Levy
JUDITH E. LEVY
United States District Judge

Rule 59 is inapplicable. It states “A motion for a new trial must be filed no
later than 28 days after the entry of judgment.” No judgment resulted from the trial
ending on August 11, 2022.
1

3

Case 5:17-cv-10164-JEL-KGA ECF No. 953, PageID.69323 Filed 09/14/22 Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served
upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s
ECF System to their respective email or first-class U.S. mail addresses
disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on September 14, 2022.
s/William Barkholz
WILLIAM BARKHOLZ
Case Manager

4