McBride v. Houston County Health Care Authority et al

Filing 259

ORDERED that defendant Dinesh Karmunachi's 184 & 212 motions to strike are denied. In resolving the pending summary-judgment motions, the court has implicitly considered the motions to strike as a notice of objections to the testimony described and has considered any related briefs as arguments on the objections; as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/30/2015. (kh, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION COURTNEY McBRIDE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) HOUSTON COUNTY HEALTH CARE ) AUTHORITY d/b/a Southeast ) Alabama Medical Center, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12cv1047-MHT ORDER It is ORDERED that defendant Dinesh Karmunachi’s motions to strike (doc. nos. 184 and 212) are denied. In resolving the pending summary-judgment motions, the court has implicitly considered the motions to strike as a notice of objections to the testimony described and has considered any related briefs as arguments on the objections. See Norman v. Southern Guar. Ins. Co., 191 F. Supp. 2d 1321, 1328 (M.D. Ala. 2002) (Thompson, J.); Anderson v. Radisson Hotel Corp., 834 F. Supp. 1364, 1368 n. 1 (S.D. Ga. 1993). The court is capable of sifting evidence, summary-judgment standard, as required without resort by the to an exclusionary process, and the court will not allow the summary-judgment stage to degenerate into a battle of motions to strike. DONE, this the 30th day of March, 2015. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?