Yazzie v. Mohave, County of et al
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)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Mohave County, Steve Latoski, Ramon
Osuna, Kevin Stockbridge and Warren
On April 1, 2015, Defendants filed a partial motion for judgment on the pleadings.
After numerous extensions, Plaintiff responded on August 14, 2015. At Defendants’
request, this Court held oral argument on October 27, 2015. At oral argument, Plaintiff’s
counsel argued that Plaintiff had evidence relevant to equitable tolling and that the
motion for judgment on the pleadings (as to the exhaustion argument) would have been
more properly filed as a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 motion.
While the Court was very disappointed that counsel would wait almost seven
months to argue that a motion needed to be considered under a different procedural
mechanism, the Court nonetheless converted the motion for judgment on the pleadings to
a motion under Rule 56, and permitted counsel to respond and present evidence. Doc.
Apparently, the Court’s order converting the motion for judgment on the pleadings
to a motion under Rule 56 was ambiguous because Plaintiff’s counsel literally just
submitted evidence. This was not the Court’s intent. Once the motion was converted (as
to the exhaustion issue), Plaintiff needed to respond as she would to any other motion for
summary judgment, including filing a memorandum of points and authorities, a statement
of facts, and then appropriately attaching evidence to the statement of facts. This Court
will not undertake to review Plaintiff’s evidence and hypothesize arguments for how
those pieces of evidence might qualify Plaintiff for equitable tolling, and/or for how long
such tolling might be appropriate.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s supplemental response filed at Doc. 70 is
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.
Dated this 6th day of November, 2015.
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?