Swaney v. Black Hills Corporation and/or Black Hills Energy

Sep 1, 2026

5:26-cv-05055

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF‘S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE LIMITED SUR-REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ SECOND MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL

Plaintiff Catherine M. Swaney moves for leave to file a sur-reply to address a recently decided Eighth Circuit opinion Defendants cite. Doc. 16. “Neither the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure nor the District of South Dakota local rules expressly authorize the filing of a sur-reply.” Cooks v. Nat. Grocers by Vitamin Cottage, Inc., No. 4:25-CV-04106-ECS, 2025 WL 2438702, at *1 (D.S.D. Aug. 25, 2025) (citation omitted). “A party may seek leave for permission to file a surreply when the moving party‘s reply brief contains new information or arguments for which an opportunity to respond is needed.” Counts v. Wasko, No. 4:23-CV-04103-KES, 2024 WL 4068651, at *3 (D.S.D. Sept. 5, 2024) (citation omitted). Accordingly, this Court determines that permitting Plaintiff to respond and address the recently decided Eight Circuit opinion Defendants cite is appropriate. Thus, Plaintiff‘s Motion for Leave to File Limited Sur-Reply in Opposition to Defendants’ Second Motion for Partial Dismissal, Doc. 16, is granted.

This Court will also permit Defendants to respond to Plaintiff‘s arguments in its sur-reply. Because Plaintiff has filed her sur-reply with her motion, Defendants may file their own sur-reply within fourteen (14) days of this Court‘s order. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Plaintiff‘s Motion for Leave to File Limited Sur-Reply in Opposition to Defendants’ Second Motion for Partial Dismissal, Doc. 16, is granted. It is further

ORDERED that Defendants may file their own sur-reply within fourteen (14) days of this Court‘s order.

DATED this 1 day of September, 2026.

BY THE COURT:

ERIC C. SCHULTE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE