Irby v. Cantwell et al
ORDER that pltf may file a response opposing defts' 23 MOTION for Summary Judgment within fourteen days of this Order as directed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 8/13/12. (vjt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
ZEAVON MONTREAL IRBY
CASE NO. 5:12CV00099 BSM/BD
DANIEL CANTWELL, et al.
Defendants have moved for summary judgment on the claims Mr. Irby has raised
against them in this lawsuit. (Docket entry #23) Mr. Irby now has the opportunity to file
a response opposing the motion. His response is due within fourteen (14) days of this
The response may include opposing affidavits that Mr. Irby or others have signed.
Affidavits must be sworn under oath (notarized) or declared under penalty of perjury (see
28 U.S.C. § 1746). Each affidavit must be based on the personal knowledge of the person
signing it. No affidavit will be considered in ruling on the motions for summary
judgment unless it was sworn to under oath or declared under penalty of perjury.
Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) includes requirements for parties who are not represented
by counsel. They must: promptly notify the Clerk and the other parties in the case of any
change in address; monitor the progress of the case and to prosecute or defend the case
diligently; sign all pleadings and include a current address, zip code, and telephone
number; and be familiar with and follow both Local Rules and the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. Any plaintiff not represented by counsel must respond to communications
from the Court within thirty (30) days, or the case can be dismissed.
Local Rule 56.1 of the Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Arkansas requires Mr. Irby to file a separate short statement setting forth the
disputed facts that he believes must be decided at a trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 13th day of August, 2012.
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?