Munt v. Schnell

Background

Joel Munt, who was representing himself, objected to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright’s July 15, 2019 order. That order partly granted Munt’s requests for more time and more space to respond to the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The magistrate judge gave Munt 30 days after July 3, 2019, making his response due August 2, 2019, and increased the word limit from 12,000 to 18,000 words. Munt had requested more time and a 24,000-word limit.

Munt argued that the restrictions effectively dismissed his case, that the magistrate judge lacked authority to impose them, and that the limits violated his constitutional protections. He also argued that the extension gave him only 14 additional days compared with the original deadline under the local rules.

Court’s analysis

The court applied the deferential standard for reviewing a magistrate judge’s nondispositive order. It concluded that the July 15 order was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. The court explained that requests for more time and additional words do not dispose of any claims and therefore are not dispositive motions. It also found that the magistrate judge had already given Munt more time and more words than the local rules required.

Munt filed a 124-page brief on August 19, 2019, 17 days after the August 2 deadline, while also requesting permission to file it. The court found his disregard of the July order unacceptable but gave him some latitude because he was representing himself.

Ruling

Judge Donovan W. Frank overruled Munt’s objections and affirmed Magistrate Judge Wright’s July 15, 2019 order. The court denied Munt’s request to accept the late and oversized brief and struck that brief. The court allowed Munt to refile a response to the defendants’ motion to dismiss within 14 days, limited to 18,000 words. The defendants were allowed 14 days to respond after Munt filed a compliant memorandum.