Cayton v. Allen et al

Filing 36

ORDER allowing Cayton an opportunity to file a response opposing the motion. To be considered, the response must be filed within 14 days of this order's entry date. If Cayton files a response, he must also file a separate, short statement setting forth the disputed facts that he believes must be decided at a trial. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris on 8/24/2016. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
JEFFERY L. CAYTON
V.

PLAINTIFF
NO: 3:15CV00297 JLH/PSH

MIKE ALLEN et al

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Defendants have moved for summary judgment as to plaintiff Jeffery L. Cayton’s claims
against them. Cayton now has an opportunity to file a response opposing the motion. To be
considered, the response must be filed within fourteen (14) days of this order’s entry date.
In opposing the motion for summary judgment, Cayton may attach affidavits that he or others
have signed. Because affidavits are sworn statements, they must be either notarized or declared
under penalty of perjury (see 28 U.S.C. § 1746). Unsworn statements will not be considered in
deciding the motion for summary judgment. And to be considered, an affidavit must be based on
the personal knowledge of the person who signs it.
If Cayton files a response, he must also file a separate, short statement setting forth the
disputed facts that he believes must be decided at a trial. See Local Rule 56.1, Rules of the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. While Cayton is not required to file a
response to the motion for summary judgment, if he does not respond, the Court can assume that the
facts set out in the statement of facts (Doc. No. 35) are true.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 24th day of August, 2016.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE