Seventh Circuit Declines to Extend Deadline for Rule 59(e) Motions | Practical Law

Seventh Circuit Declines to Extend Deadline for Rule 59(e) Motions | Practical Law

In a case of first impression for the court, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held in Williams v. Illinois that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 6(d) does not extend the deadline for filing motions under FRCP 59(e).

Seventh Circuit Declines to Extend Deadline for Rule 59(e) Motions

Practical Law Legal Update 0-552-0825 (Approx. 3 pages)

Seventh Circuit Declines to Extend Deadline for Rule 59(e) Motions

by Practical Law Litigation
Published on 16 Dec 2013USA (National/Federal)
In a case of first impression for the court, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held in Williams v. Illinois that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 6(d) does not extend the deadline for filing motions under FRCP 59(e).
On December 11, 2013, in a case of first impression for the court, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Williams v. Illinois held that FRCP 6(d) does not extend the deadline for filing motions to alter or amend a judgment under FRCP 59(e) (No. 13-2652, (7th Cir. Dec. 11, 2013)). FRCP 6(d) automatically adds three days to a time period when the time period begins to run after certain kinds of service under FRCP 5 (including electronic service and service by mail).
In October 2011, John Williams filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Illinois law against more than 100 defendants. A year after the action began, Williams had not served his complaint on any of the defendants. The US District Court for the Central District of Illinois ultimately dismissed the suit for lack of prosecution.
Williams asked the court to reinstate the case 29 days after the judgment was entered, arguing that he made diligent efforts to serve the defendants. However, because Williams missed the 28-day deadline to move for reconsideration under FRCP 59(e), the court construed the motion as a request to vacate the judgment under FRCP 60(b). After determining that Williams had failed to establish any basis for vacating the judgment, the court denied the motion.
On appeal, Williams argued that he was entitled to an extra three days under FRCP 6(d) to file his motion for reconsideration because he received the court's dismissal for lack of prosecution by mail. He argued that the district court therefore erred in construing his motion as a motion to vacate under FRCP 60(b). The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court and rejected Williams's argument, reasoning that FRCP 6(d) does not enlarge the filing time when the time period at issue is triggered by the entry of judgment. The Seventh Circuit also noted that it joined every circuit that has ruled on the issue in concluding that FRCP 6(d) does not extend the deadline for filing Rule 59(e) motions.
The Williams v. Illinois case is further proof that courts strictly construe the 28-day time period for filing a motion to alter or amend a judgment under Rule 59(e). Thus, when calculating the deadline for filing a motion to alter or amend, counsel should be careful not to include the additional three days provided under FRCP 6(d).