Civil Engineering Consulting Service Inc v. Anderson Columbia Co Inc Boggs Paving Inc et al
Order to Vacate 57 Text Order granting 55 MOTION to Amend Complaint; granting 61 MOTION for Reconsideration re 57 Text Order . Hearing on Motion to amend the complaint to be set for July 27 at 2:30. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 7/14/17. (mflo, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Civil Engineering Consulting Services Inc.,
C/A No. 3:16-cv-2540-JFA
Anderson Columbia Co., Inc./Boggs
Paving, Inc., A Joint Venture, Anderson
Columbia Co., Inc., Boggs Paving, Inc. and
Liberty Mutual Insurance Company,
This case is before the court on defendant Boggs Paving, Inc.’s (“Boggs”) motion for
reconsideration (ECF No. 61) of this court’s previous order granting plaintiff Civil Engineering
Consulting Services Inc.’s (“CECS”) motion to amend its complaint (ECF No. 57).
Within its motion, Boggs states that the order granting CECS’ motion to amend was filed a
week prior to the deadline for Boggs to file a memorandum in opposition to CECS’ motion. Boggs
also goes on to argue why the motion to amend should not be granted. CECS timely filed a response
to Boggs’ motion in which it also discusses the merits of its earlier motion to amend. (ECF No. 64).
In light of the fact that CECS’ motion to amend was granted before receiving a memorandum
in opposition from Boggs, this court finds it prudent to revisit CECS’ motion to amend its complaint.1
Accordingly, the order granting CECS’ motion to amend (ECF No. 57) is vacated and the clerk is
“[A]ny order or other decision, however designated, that adjudicates fewer than all the claims
or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not end the action as to any of the
claims or parties and may be revised at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all
the claims and all the parties' rights and liabilities.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 54.
instructed to reinstate CECS’ motion to amend the complaint (ECF No. 55) as pending on the court
The court will hear oral arguments on Plaintiff’s motion to amend on July 27, 2017, at 2:30.
Although the court will accept additional briefing on this matter2, no further briefing is required
because the merits of Plaintiff’s motion to amend have been fully addressed within the party’s
memoranda in support of and in opposition to Boggs’ motion for reconsideration.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 14, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge
Any additional briefing on this matter must be submitted by July 21, 2017.
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?