From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maxen Capital, LLC v. Sutherland

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
Feb 26, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-08-3590 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2009)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-08-3590.

February 26, 2009


ORDER


The plaintiffs, Maxen Capital, LLC, William Baker, and Robert Erwin, filed a motion to strike the defendants' "late-filed" reply to the plaintiffs' response to the defendants' motion to dismiss. (Docket Entry No. 15, 17). The defendants filed a response. (Docket Entry No. 16). The motion to strike is based on the fact that the court's deadline for the defendants' reply was February 16, 2009. The reply was filed on February 17. As the defendants point out, however, the filing was timely because February 16 was a federal holiday — Washington's Birthday — and under Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the deadline was the "next day that is not . . . a legal holiday," February 17.

The motion to strike is denied.


Summaries of

Maxen Capital, LLC v. Sutherland

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
Feb 26, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-08-3590 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2009)
Case details for

Maxen Capital, LLC v. Sutherland

Case Details

Full title:MAXEN CAPITAL, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. TIMOTHY SUTHERLAND, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division

Date published: Feb 26, 2009

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-08-3590 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2009)

Citing Cases

Bancroft Life & Casualty ICC, Ltd. v. FFD Res. II, LLC

This Court agrees. MaxEn Capital, LLC v. Sutherland, 2009 WL 936895, at *7, citing Scherk v. Alberto-Culver…

Bancroft Life & Casualty ICC, Ltd. v. FFD Resources II, LLC

This Court agrees. MaxEn Capital, LLC v. Sutherland, 2009 WL 936895, at *7,citing Scherk v. Alberto–Culver…