From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lighthouse Community Ch. of God v. C. of Southfield

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Aug 10, 2007
Case No. 05-40220 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 10, 2007)

Opinion

Case No. 05-40220.

August 10, 2007


ORDER STRIKING MOTION


On August 9, 2007, Defendant City of Southfield ("Defendant") filed an "Emergency Motion to Permit City of Southfield to Disclose Records Under Michigan Freedom of Information Act." Defendant states that it received a request for unspecified information under the Freedom of Information Act, M.C.L. § 15.231 et seq. ("FOIA") on July 19, 2007, that the confidentiality agreement entered into by the parties requires that neither party disclose information regarding the resolution of the case without a motion and determination by the Court, and that the City must respond to the FOIA request by August 10, 2007. Nevertheless, Defendant waited until just after 6:00 p.m on August 9, 2007, to file the instant motion.

The instant motion consists of six sentences and does not attach the FOIA request at issue or even identify the nature of the information sought in the FOIA request. In violation of Rule 7.1(c) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of Michigan, Defendant did not submit a brief in support of the motion.

In addition, Local Rule 7.1(a) provides that the movant must ascertain whether the contemplated motion will be opposed. "If concurrence is not obtained, the motion or request must state: (A) there was a conference between attorneys or unrepresented parties in which the movant explained the nature of the motion or request and its legal basis and requested but did not obtain concurrence in the relief sought; or (B) despite reasonable efforts specified in the motion or request, the movant was unable to conduct a conference." L.R. 7.1(a)(2). Here, Defendant's motion simply states that Defense Counsel sent Plaintiff's Counsel a single letter seeking a stipulation to release the records and has not heard back from him. The Court does not view the sending of a single letter, with no follow-up telephone call or any other efforts, as reasonable efforts to obtain concurrence prior to filing an emergency motion in which an immediate ruling by the Court is requested.

Accordingly, the Court hereby STRIKES Defendant's "Emergency Motion to Permit City of Southfield to Disclose Records Under Michigan Freedom of Information Act" [Docket Entry No. 244] from the docket for failure to comply with Local Rule 7.1(a) and (c).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lighthouse Community Ch. of God v. C. of Southfield

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Aug 10, 2007
Case No. 05-40220 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 10, 2007)
Case details for

Lighthouse Community Ch. of God v. C. of Southfield

Case Details

Full title:Lighthouse Community Church of God, Plaintiff, v. City of Southfield et…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Aug 10, 2007

Citations

Case No. 05-40220 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 10, 2007)