Hill v. Rectenwald et al
ORDER. Defendants are directed to provide the Court with a complete copy of Plaintiff's September 29, 2010 deposition within 10 days of the date of this Order. The Court will then rule on the 144 First MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Michael Hughes, Jeffrey Ewell. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 3/10/11. (kpr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION JESSIE HILL, ADC #104136 v. ROBERT RECTENWALD, et al. ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Ewell and Hughes (Doc. No. 144). Plaintiff filed a Response in opposition to the Motion (Doc. No. 147). Defendants state Plaintiff presents insufficient evidence to support his claim of failure to protect against them and in support of their Motion, they submit excerpts from Plaintiff's deposition (Doc. No. 144-1). However, in his Response, Plaintiff complains that Defendants did not provide the Court with the entire deposition, and infers that the missing parts of the deposition are relevant to his claim. In an abundance of caution and in order to ensure a just resolution to the pending Motion, the Court finds Defendants should provide the Court with a complete copy of Plaintiff's deposition prior to a ruling on the Motion. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendants shall provide to the Court a complete copy of Plaintiff's September 29, 2010 Deposition within 10 days of the date of this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of March, 2011. 5:10-cv-00030-JMM-JTK DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF
______________________________________ JEROME T. KEARNEY 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?