Doering v. Moore et al
ORDER directing the Plaintiff to file within 30 days, a separate Response to 30 MOTION for Summary Judgment on the issue of exhaustion filed by Wendy Kelley and 33 filed by Annette Esaw, and a separate Statements of Disputed Facts that comply with the Local Rule, and the instructions set forth in this Order. Plaintiff is advised that failure to timely and properly comply with this Order will result in: (a) all of the facts in Defendants' summary judgment papers being deemed admitted by Plaintiff; or (b) the dismissal of this action, without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 04/08/2014. (kcs)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
ALAN L. DOERING
DR. MOORE, Cummins Unit,
Arkansas Department of Correction, et al.
Defendants Kelley and Esaw have filed separate Motions for Summary
Judgment, Briefs in Support, and a Statements of Undisputed Facts. Docs. 30 thru 35.
Plaintiff must respond to each Motion.
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). This means that
Plaintiff’s Responses must include his legal arguments, as well as affidavits,1 prison
records, or other evidence establishing that there is a genuine issue of material fact
that must be resolved at a hearing or trial.
Furthermore, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1, Plaintiff must also separately file
Statements of Disputed Facts, which lists: (a) any disagreement he has with the
The affidavit must be based upon the personal knowledge of the person executing the
affidavit and must be either: (1) sworn and subscribed to by a notary public; or (2) executed under
penalty of perjury, as provided for by 28 U.S.C. § 1746.
specifically numbered factual assertions in each of the Defendants’ Statement of
Undisputed Facts (Docs. 31 & 35); and (b) any other disputed facts that he believes
must be resolved at a hearing or trial.2
Finally, Plaintiff is advised that if he intends to rely on documents that have
been previously filed in the record, 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 Plaintiff’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:
Plaintiff must file, within thirty days of the entry of this Order,
separate Response to Defendant Kelley's and Defendant Esaw’s Motions for Summary
Judgment and a separate Statements of Disputed Fact that comply with the Fed. R.
Civ. P. 56, Local Rule 56.1, and the instructions set forth in this Order.
Plaintiff is advised that the failure to timely and properly comply with
this Order will result in: (a) all of the facts in Defendants’ summary judgment papers
If Plaintiff disputes any of the facts in Defendants’ Statements 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.
being deemed admitted by Plaintiff, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1(c); or (b) the
dismissal of this action, without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).
Dated this 8th day of April, 2014.
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?