Hamidi v. City of Kirksville, Missouri et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Amir Hamidi's Motion to Strike Defendants' Reply [ECF No. 129 ] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Amir Hamidi is allowed to file what is in effect a sur-reply to Defendants' reply, and shall file this motion by October 12, 2016. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 10/5/2016. (CBL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
CITY OF KIRKSVILLE, MISSOURI, et al.,
No. 2:14CV00087 ERW
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Amir Hamidi’s Motion to Strike
Defendant’s Reply [ECF No. 129]. In his motion Plaintiff argues because Defendants’ Bill of
Costs [ECF No. 118] is not a motion, Defendants were not entitled to file their Reply in Support
of Memorandum in Support of Their Bill of Costs [ECF No. 124] in response to Plaintiff’s
Opposition to Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Their Bill of Costs. [ECF No. 122].
Accordingly, Plaintiff argues Defendants reply motion be struck, or in the alternative, the Court
allow Plaintiff to file a “reply” motion. Defendants respond to the extent Plaintiff’s motion was
mistitled; the Court should allow their reply motion to stand in substance regardless of how
Plaintiff’s opposition motion is styled. [ECF No. 131]. The Court rejects Plaintiff’s motion to
strike Defendants’ reply, but will allow Plaintiff the opportunity to file, what is in substance, a
sur-reply to the motion.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Amir Hamidi’s Motion to Strike Defendants’
Reply [ECF No. 129] is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Amir Hamidi is allowed to file what is in
effect a sur-reply to Defendants’ reply, and shall file this motion by October 12, 2016.
Dated this 5th Day of October, 2016.
E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?