Smith et al v. Toyota Motor Corporation et al

Filing 183

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. This matter comes before the Court on the Court's Order 182 denying Plaintiff's Motion for New Trial 173 . In its ruling, the Court erroneously applied an older version of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), which required motions to alter or amend to be filed within 10 days after the entry of judgment. The Rule has since been amended to allow 28 days after the entry of judgment to file a motion to alter or amend. Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). Under this versio n, Plaintiff's filing was timely. Accordingly, this Court vacates its prior ruling denying as untimely Plaintiffs claim in her Motion for New Trial 173 which effectively requests this Court alter or amend its order on Defendant's Motio n for Summary Judgment 103 . This Court will rule on the substance of this issue related to Plaintiffs alleged claim of defective seatbelt design of the Toyota 4Runner in an order to follow. The Court's rulings on Plaintiff's other grounds for her Motion for New Trial remain. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 6/20/2018. (CBL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
KRISTIN MARIE SMITH

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION
Defendant.

Case No. 2:16CV24 ERW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Court’s Order [182] denying Plaintiff’s
Motion for New Trial [173]. In its ruling, the Court erroneously applied an older version of
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), which required motions to alter or amend to be filed
within 10 days after the entry of judgment. The Rule has since been amended to allow 28 days
after the entry of judgment to file a motion to alter or amend. Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). Under this
version, Plaintiff’s filing was timely. Accordingly, this Court vacates its prior ruling denying as
untimely Plaintiff’s claim in her Motion for New Trial [173] which effectively requests this
Court alter or amend its order on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [103]. This Court
will rule on the substance of this issue related to Plaintiff’s alleged claim of defective seatbelt
design of the Toyota 4Runner in an order to follow. The Court’s rulings on Plaintiff’s other
grounds for her Motion for New Trial remain.
So Ordered this 20th Day of June, 2018.

E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1