Robinson v. Clark et al

Filing 120

ORDER allowing Robinson to file a response to 117 defendant's motion for summary judgment along with a separate statement of disputed facts. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris on 07/08/2024. (llg)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION WALLACE T. ROBINSON v. PLAINTIFF No: 4:21-cv-00674 KGB/PSH ADAM CLARK, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER On June 28, 2024, Defendants Emmer Branch, Adam Clark, and Thomas Hurst filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on the merits of Plaintiff Wallace T. Robinson’s claims, together with a Brief in Support and a Statement of Undisputed Material Facts (Doc. Nos. 117- 119). Robinson now has an opportunity to file a response opposing the motion. To be considered, the response must be filed within twenty-eight days of this order’s entry date. At the summary judgment stage, a plaintiff cannot rest upon mere allegations and, instead, must meet proof with proof. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). Accordingly, Robinson’s response must include legal arguments as well as evidence establishing that there is a genuine issue of material fact that must be resolved at a hearing or trial. Such evidence may include declarations or notarized affidavits that he or others have signed. Affidavits and declarations are sworn statements that are made 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 or declaration must be based on personal knowledge of the person who signs it. If Robinson files a response, he must also file a separate, short statement which lists: (a) any disagreement he has with the specifically numbered factual assertions contained in the defendants’ statement of undisputed facts; and (b) any other disputed facts that he believes must be resolved at a hearing or trial. See Local Rule 56.1, Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. If Robinson disputes any of the facts set forth in the defendants’ statement of undisputed facts, he must identify each numbered paragraph that contains the facts he disputes and, for each paragraph, explain why he disputes those facts. Finally, Robinson is advised that if he intends to rely upon grievances or records that have been filed with the Court previously, he must specifically refer to those documents by docket number, page, date, and heading. The Court will not sift through the file to find support for Robinson’s factual contentions. See Crossley v. Georgia-Pacific, Corp., 355 F.3d 1112, 1113-14 (8th Cir. 2004) (affirming the grant of summary judgment because a plaintiff failed to properly refer to specific pages of the record that supported his position). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: Robinson may file a response to the defendant’s motion for summary judgment along with a separate statement of disputed facts that complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, Local Rule 56.1 and the instructions set forth in this Order within twenty-eight days. While Robinson is not required to file a response to the motion for summary judgment, if he does not respond, the facts set forth in the defendants’ statement of facts may be deemed admitted by Robinson, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1(c). IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of July, 2024. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?