Lees v. Carthage College

Filing 131

ORDER signed by Judge Rudolph T. Randa on 7/30/2013 DENYING 125 Motion to Strike. Briefing schedule for motions in limine VACATED; Final Pretrial Conference set for 9/10/2013 CANCELED; Jury Trial set for 10/7/2013 CANCELED. (cc: all counsel) (cb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
KATHERINE LEES,
Plaintiff,
-vs-

Case No. 10-C-86

CARTHAGE COLLEGE, et al.,
Defendants.
DECISION AND ORDER

On August 29, 2011, the Court granted Carthage College’s motion for
summary judgment. On appeal, the Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded for further
proceedings. Lees v. Carthage College, 714 F.3d 516 (7th Cir. 2013). At a conference
call held on June 19, the Court established a supplemental discovery deadline, a
briefing schedule for the filing of motions in limine, and set this matter for trial in
early October. The Court did not set a dispositive motion deadline, but only five days
after the conference call, Carthage College filed a motion for summary judgment. This
motion raises issues that were raised in the first summary judgment motion but not
ruled upon by the Court.
The plaintiff, Katherine Lees, moves to strike Carthage College’s motion, but
there is nothing which precludes its filing. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(b) (“Unless a different
time is set by local rule or the court orders otherwise, a party may file a motion for
summary judgment at any time until 30 days after the close of all discovery”).

Moreover, the Seventh Circuit remanded for further proceedings consistent with its
opinion, and there is nothing inconsistent about re-visiting Carthage College’s
alternative summary judgment arguments in light of the Seventh Circuit’s ruling. See,
e.g., United States v. Sims, --- F.3d ---, 2013 WL 3336734, at *2 (7th Cir. July 3, 2013)
(“in a general remand the appellate court returns the case to the trial court for further
proceedings consistent with the appellate court’s decision, but consistency with that
decision is the only limitation imposed by the appellate court”); Driskill Inv., Ltd. V.
G. Heileman Brewing Co. Inc., No. 86 C 4901, 1990 WL 143261, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Sept.
28, 1990) (“when the remand is general, the district court is free to decide any matter
not foreclosed by the mandate”) (citing Moore’s Fed. Practice). That said, if the Court
had known that Carthage College was going to file another dispositive motion, it
would not have set this matter for trial in October. As it stands, the reply brief is due
to be filed less than two weeks before the due date for motions in limine, a month
before the final pretrial conference, and two months before trial. This is an untenable
situation.

The parties could be preparing for a trial that might never occur; at

minimum, a ruling from the Court has the potential to narrow or frame the pertinent
issues. Moreover, the Court simply needs more time to consider these arguments. If
they were simple or straightforward, the Court would have ruled on them when they
were initially raised.
Lees’ motion to strike [ECF No. 125] is DENIED. The briefing schedule for
motions in limine is VACATED. The dates for trial and the final pretrial conference
-2-

are CANCELED. The deadline for supplemental discovery remains in effect.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 30th day of July, 2013.

BY THE COURT:

__________________________
HON. RUDOLPH T. RANDA
U.S. District Judge

-3-