Morgan v. Saehaesung Alabama, Inc.
OPINION AND ORDER: It is ORDERED that plaintiff Michael Morgan's 24 Motion to Strike and defendant Saehaesung Alabama, Inc.s 28 Motion to Strike are denied as further set out in the opinion and order. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/18/2014. (dmn, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION
SAEHAESUNG ALABAMA, INC.,
CIVIL ACTION NO.
OPINION AND ORDER
Both parties have filed motions to strike affidavit
and deposition testimony which the other party offered
with regard to defendant Saehaesung Alabama, Inc.’s motion
for summary judgment.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) applies only to
“strike” evidence in a motion for summary judgement or
response to that motion are not a request to strike
material from a pleading.
Norman v. Southern Guar. Ins.
Co., 191 F. Supp. 2d 1321, 1327-28 (M.D. Ala. 2002)
Nevertheless, in resolving Saehaesung’s
considered the motions to strike as, instead, objections
to the evidence offered.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(2) (“A
party may object that the material cited to support or
dispute a fact cannot be presented in a form that would be
sifting through the evidence, as required by the summaryjudgment
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that plaintiff Michael
Morgan’s motion to strike (Doc. No. 24) and defendant
Saehaesung Alabama, Inc.’s motion to strike (Doc. No. 28)
DONE, this the 18th day of March, 2014.
/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?