Yazzie v. Mohave, County of et al

Filing 71

ORDER that Plaintiff's supplemental response filed at Doc. 70 is stricken. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a supplemental response that fully complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Rule Civil 56.1 by Tuesday , November 10, 2015. If Plaintiff fails to file a complying response within this deadline, the Court will deem all of Plaintiff's procedural objections to this Court considering the pending motion as one for judgment on the pleadings to be waived. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 11/6/2015. (KMG)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Vina Yazzie,

No. CV-14-08153-PCT-JAT
Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

Mohave County, Steve Latoski, Ramon
Osuna, Kevin Stockbridge and Warren
Twitchel,

13
14

ORDER

Defendants.

15
16

On April 1, 2015, Defendants filed a partial motion for judgment on the pleadings.

17

After numerous extensions, Plaintiff responded on August 14, 2015. At Defendants’

18

request, this Court held oral argument on October 27, 2015. At oral argument, Plaintiff’s

19

counsel argued that Plaintiff had evidence relevant to equitable tolling and that the

20

motion for judgment on the pleadings (as to the exhaustion argument) would have been

21

more properly filed as a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 motion.

22

While the Court was very disappointed that counsel would wait almost seven

23

months to argue that a motion needed to be considered under a different procedural

24

mechanism, the Court nonetheless converted the motion for judgment on the pleadings to

25

a motion under Rule 56, and permitted counsel to respond and present evidence. Doc.

26

68.

27

Apparently, the Court’s order converting the motion for judgment on the pleadings

28

to a motion under Rule 56 was ambiguous because Plaintiff’s counsel literally just

1

submitted evidence. This was not the Court’s intent. Once the motion was converted (as

2

to the exhaustion issue), Plaintiff needed to respond as she would to any other motion for

3

summary judgment, including filing a memorandum of points and authorities, a statement

4

of facts, and then appropriately attaching evidence to the statement of facts. This Court

5

will not undertake to review Plaintiff’s evidence and hypothesize arguments for how

6

those pieces of evidence might qualify Plaintiff for equitable tolling, and/or for how long

7

such tolling might be appropriate.

8

Accordingly,

9

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s supplemental response filed at Doc. 70 is

10

stricken.

11

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a supplemental response

12

that fully complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Rule Civil 56.1 by

13

Tuesday, November 10, 2015. If Plaintiff fails to file a complying response within this

14

deadline, the Court will deem all of Plaintiff’s procedural objections to this Court

15

considering the pending motion as one for judgment on the pleadings to be waived.

16

Dated this 6th day of November, 2015.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-