Peet et al v. Sidney et al

Filing 59

ORDER granting 55 Request for Extension of Time for Court Hearing Motion. The Court shall hear Defendants' motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 33, 37) and Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 52) on November 1, 2018, at 1:00 p.m. in Courtroom 9W of the U.S. Courthouse, 300 South Fourth Street, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415. (Written Opinion) Signed by Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung on 9/13/2018. (EB) cc: Pro Se Plaintiffs. Modified text on 9/13/2018 (MMP).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

John E. Peet,

Case No. 17-cv-1870 (DWF/TNL)
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

Michele K. Smith,
Acting Director MN Hud Dept,
Lendine Darden International,
Sue Morfit,
New Orleans Court Apt,
Mark Jones,
New Orleans Court Apt,
Mark Z. Jones,
Highland Management Group Inc.,
Michelle Luna,
Housing Specialist HRA, and
Debbie Goettel,
Mayor of Richfield MN Now Commissioner
Hennepin County,
Defendants.

Presently, Defendants Debbie Goettel, Michelle Luna, Sue Morfitt, and “Mark Jones”
(collectively, “Defendants”) have filed motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 33, 37), which are
scheduled to be heard on September 26, 2018. (ECF No. 49.)

1

On September 10, 2018, pro se Plaintiff John E. Peet filed a motion for summary
judgment. (ECF No. 52.) Also on September 10, Plaintiff filed a request for an extension of the
September 26 hearing date. (ECF No. 55.) Defendants Sue Morfitt and “Mark Jones” oppose
the requested extension.
In light of Plaintiff’s pro se status, the efficiencies to be gained by hearing these three
motions together, and the Court’s discretion in managing its docket, the Court will grant
Plaintiff’s motion. See, e.g., Dietz v. Bouldin, 136 S. Ct. 1885, 1892, 195 (2016) (“[D]istrict
courts have the inherent authority to manage their dockets and courtrooms with a view toward
the efficient and expedient resolution of cases.”); Zerger & Mauer LLP v. City of Greenwood,
751 F.3d 928, 931 (8th Cir. 2014) (“[A]ll courts have inherent authority to ‘manage their own
affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.’” (quoting Chambers v.
NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 43 (1991)).
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. Plaintiff’s Request for Extension of Time for Court Hearing Motion (ECF No.
55) is GRANTED.
2. The Court shall hear Defendants’ motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 33, 37) and
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 52) on November 1,
2018, at 1:00 p.m. in Courtroom 9W of the U.S. Courthouse, 300 South
Fourth Street, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415.

Dated: September 13 , 2018

s/ Tony N. Leung
TONY N. LEUNG
United States Magistrate Judge

Peet v. Smith et al.
Case No. 17-cv-1870 (DWF/TNL)

2