Wisconsin Window Concepts Inc v. Doleschy et al

Filing 9

ORDER signed by Judge J P Stadtmueller on 10/8/10: denying 3 plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Injunction; granting 5 plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Party Allied Construction Employers Association; dismissing without prejudice the complaint against Allied Construction Employers Association. (cc: all counsel) (nm)

Wisconsin Window Concepts Inc v. Doleschy et al

Doc. 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
____________________________________________ W IS C O N S IN W IN D O W CONCEPTS INC, P l a i n t if f , v. U N IT E D BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS & JOINERS OF AMERICA CHICAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS, and A L L IE D CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION, D e fe n d a n ts . ____________________________________________ Case No. 10-CV-726

ORDER
O n August 24, 2010, the plaintiff filed a complaint in this court against four d e fe n d a n ts , (Docket #1), two of whom have since been dismissed pursuant to a s tip u la tio n of the parties. (Docket #7). On that same day, the plaintiff filed a motion fo r a temporary injunction. (Docket #3). The plaintiff did not provide the court with a memorandum of law or other material in support of the motion. Failure to file a s u p p o rtin g memorandum of law violates Civil Local Rule 7(a). Moreover, the plaintiff n e ve r contacted chambers to inquire as to the procedure for resolving a temporary in ju n c tio n . Such actions are truly remarkable, given that a preliminary injunction is "a n extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right." Winter v. NRDC, Inc., 129 S. C t. 365, 376, 172 L. Ed. 2d 249 (2008). However, not to be outdone, the

d e fe n d a n ts , who have been served and are represented by an attorney who has filed a notice of appearance before this court, failed to oppose the plaintiff's motion within th e time allotted by the local rules. Civil L.R. 7(b). Moreover, according to this

Dockets.Justia.com

c o u rt's local rules, the "failure to file a memorandum in opposition to a motion is s u ffic ie n t cause for the Court to grant the motion." Civil L.R. 7(d). As this case

p re s e n tly stands, it appears to the court that all of the parties' attorneys are all but b a ttlin g to see who can violate more of the local rules in this litigation. W h ile there c e rta in ly will be no winner in such a contest, one clear loser will be the judicial p ro c e s s . "Compliance with the [local] rules is expected," Gen. L.R. 1, and the court's fa irly basic expectations have not yet come close to being met by both parties' a tto rn e ys in this case. The court anticipates the parties' future filings with this court w ill be far more attentive to the local rules' requirements. W ith respect to the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, the court does n o t hesitate in denying the motion. A preliminary injunction will not be granted u n le s s "the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of persuasion," which re q u ire s the plaintiff to "initially establish a better than negligible chance of s u c c e e d in g on the merits and the inadequacy of legal remedies." Chi. Dist. Council o f Carpenters Pension Fund v. K&I Constr., 270 F.3d 1060, 1064 (7th Cir. 2001). A s the plaintiff has not presented any legal authority to support its motion, the court is obliged to deny the motion. Moreover, the plaintiff should take pause before filing a n y similar motion, as the plaintiff's lack of diligence in pursuing its preliminary in ju n c tio n "raises questions" regarding the bona fides of any claim that the plaintiff w ill face irreparable harm if a preliminary injunction is not entered. Ty, Inc. v. Jones G ro u p Inc., 237 F.3d 891, 903 (7th Cir. 2001).

-2-

T h e plaintiff has also moved to voluntarily dismiss defendant Allied C o n s tru c tio n Employers Association. (Docket #5). Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 1 (a )(2 ), an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff's request by a court order. The fe d e ra l rule's presumption is that the action be dismissed without prejudice. Fed. R. C iv. P. 41(a)(2). As such, the court will dismiss the plaintiff's claim against Allied C o n s tru c tio n Employers Association without prejudice. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for a temporary injunction (Docket #3) b e and the same is hereby DENIED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to dismiss party Allied C o n s tru c tio n Employers Association (Docket #5) be and the same is hereby G R AN T E D ; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint against defendant Allied C o n s tru c tio n Employers Association be and the same is hereby DISMISSED w ith o u t prejudice. Dated at Milwaukee, W is c o n s in , this 8th day of October, 2010. BY THE COURT:

J .P . Stadtmueller U .S . District Judge

-3-