Richardson v. Navistar Inc et al

Filing 99

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 91 Motion to Strike 84 Statement of Facts (Local Rule 56.1), 85 Brief in Support, 83 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Navistar must file a substituted statement by February 17, 2012, which must conform to the conditions set forth in this Order. Richardson's responses to motion for summary judgment, related brief, and substituted statement is extended until February 27, 2012. Navistar may file a 15-page reply by March 6, 2012. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 2/9/12. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION ALICIA RICHARDSON, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of SANDY OSBURN, Deceased v. PLAINTIFFS No.l:10-cv-42-DPM NAVISTAR, INC.; INTERNATIONAL TRUCK AND ENGINE CORPORATION; and N AVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORP. DEFENDANTS ORDER To keep the case on track, the Court needs to rule now on Richardson's 7February2012motiontoeitherstrikeNavistar'ssummary-judgmentpapers or get more time to respond. Navistar has not been heard. But the issues are clear. 1. Navistar's 103-page brief is far too long. The Court nevertheless declines to strike it. The Court has not imposed any page limits - until now. The Court reminds counsel that, as Judge Richard S. Arnold was fond of saying, "brief" is an adjective as well as a noun. 2. Navistar's Local Rule 56.1 statement is neither concise nor helpful in winnowing the undisputed material facts from the genuinely disputed ones. The statement also lacks citations to the summary-judgment record, although this omission is partly cured by the numerous record citations in the brief. Record citations in the statement are not prescribed by the Local Rule, but traditi,on and good practice strongly encourage them. Based on the statement's defects, the Court strikes it. 3. Navistar must file a substituted statement by 17 February 2012. This substituted statement must conform to these conditions: • It may not exceed twenty-five pages; • It must contain citations to specific pages of the summary-judgment record; • it must contain material undisputed facts, not arguments or commentary; and • it must be presented in single-sentence, numbered paragraphs. Navistar shall also send the substituted statement in Word or Wordperfect to Richardson. Richardson must copy it and respond in interrogatory-answer fashion - with single-sentence answers also supported by citations to specific pages of the summary-judgment record. Richardson's responding statement must not exceed fifty pages. The deadline for Richardson's responses to Navistar's motion for summary judgment, related brief, and substituted statement is extended until 27 February 2012. Navistar may file a fifteen-page reply by 6 March 2012. 4. Navistar's filing of its voluminous summary-judgment papers a few hours late is an insufficient reason for the Court to deny that motion. Motion to strike, Document No. 91, granted in part and denied in part. So Ordered. v D.P. Marshall Jr. 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?