Bogan v. MTD Consumer Group, Inc.

Filing 92

AMENDED ORDER re 91 Order on Motion for Extension of Time, granting 89 Motion for Extension of Time; denying 90 Motion for Extension of Time. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 2/9/2017. (adm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSPPI
ABERDEEN DIVISION
SHEANETER J. BOGAN
V.

PLAINTIFF

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14CV225-SA-DAS

MTD CONSUMER GROUP, INC.

DEFENDANT
ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for
Attorney’s Fees and Expenses [89], as well as Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time for the
Filing of Post-Trial Motions Under FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e) [90].
Regarding Plaintiff’s Motion, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2)(B) requires a
motion for attorneys’ fees and expenses to be filed within fourteen (14) days after the entry of
the judgment. However, for good cause shown, the court may extend such deadline. FED. R. CIV.
P. 6(b). Plaintiff notes that a Motion for Attorney’s Fees may become moot pending the outcome
of Plaintiff’s anticipated post-trial motion requesting a new trial on the issue of damages, and
therefore requests that the deadline be extended to fourteen days after the entry of this Court’s
final order disposing of all post-trial motions. Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED.
Turning to Defendant’s Motion, Rule 59(e), provides in pertinent part, “a motion to alter
or amend the judgment shall be served not later than 28 days after entry of the judgment.” FED.
R. CIV. P. 59(e). However, the court is not permitted to extend the time in which such a motion
may be filed. See FED. R. CIV. P. 6 (“A court must not extend the time to act under Rules 50(b)
and (d), 52(b), 59(b), (d), and (e), and 60(b)”). Therefore, Defendants’ Motion is DENIED.
SO ORDERED this 9th day of February, 2017.
/s/ Sharion Aycock
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE