Dedge v. Kendrick
Decision Date | 21 July 1988 |
Docket Number | No. 87-3870,87-3870 |
Citation | 849 F.2d 1398 |
Parties | Walter G. DEDGE, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Steve KENDRICK, Defendant-Appellant. Non-Argument Calendar. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
Julius F. Parker, Jr., Parker, Skelding, McVoy & Labasky, Tallahassee, Fla., for defendant-appellant.
Joseph R. Moss, Cocoa, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Before HILL, VANCE and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
The defendant, Steve Kendrick, appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for summary judgment. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(2), the district court is required to enter an order limiting the time to file and hear motions. In this case, the district court entered an order requiring that motions for summary judgment be filed by October 30, 1987. The defendant filed his motion for summary judgment on December 7, 1987. Therefore, the district court properly denied the motion as untimely, and we need not address the merits of the motion in this appeal. See United States Dominator, Inc. v. Factory Ship Robert E. Resoff, 768 F.2d 1099, 1104 (9th Cir.1985).
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Makin ex rel. Russell v. Hawaii, CV 98-00997 DAE.
...a motion filed after the scheduling order cut-off date where no request to modify the order has been made); see also Dedge v. Kendrick, 849 F.2d 1398 (11th Cir.1988) (motion filed after the scheduling order cut-off date is untimely and may be denied solely on that Johnson v. Mammoth Recreat......
-
C.F. v. Capistrano Unified School Dist.
...however, has found to the contrary. Id. (citing Jauregui v. City of Glendale, 852 F.2d 1128, 1133-34 (9th Cir. 1988); Dedge v. Kendrick, 849 F.2d 1398 (11th Cir.1988)). Although a request to modify the Scheduling Order need not appear in a separate motion, the School Defendants do not speci......
-
US v. Princeton Gamma-Tech, Inc.
...have refused to overlook filing deadlines. See, e.g., Edwards v. Cass County, Tex., 919 F.2d 273, 275 (5th Cir.1990); Dedge v. Kendrick, 849 F.2d 1398 (11th Cir.1988); Doe v. British Univs. North American Club, 788 F.Supp. 1286, 1297 (D.Conn.1992); State of N.Y. v. Allied Corp., 789 F.Supp.......
-
Nutton v. Sunset Station, Inc.
...amend the scheduling order and the court's denial of that motion a denial of a motion to amend the scheduling order”); Dedge v. Kendrick, 849 F.2d 1398 (11th Cir.1988) (holding that a motion filed after scheduling order deadline is untimely and, where appropriate, may be denied solely on th......