Stacker et al v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al

Filing 117

STANDING ORDER re Summary Judgment Motions signed by District Judge George H. Wu on 7/12/19. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8
9

Valerie Stacker, et al.,
Plaintiff(s),

10
v.

11
12

J. Johnson, et al.,
Defendant(s).

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

1.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 2:16-cv-02913-GHW
Standing Order Re Summary Judgment
Motions

You are instructed to read and to follow the requirements in Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and

Central District of California Local Rules 56-1 through 56-3.
2.

A moving party who files a reply/response to an opposition to a motion for summary

judgment (where the opposing party has filed a “Statement of Genuine Disputes”) shall file a
“Response to Statement of Genuine Disputes” using the format delineated below. Said Response
will include each initially designated uncontroverted fact (and supporting evidence), and, if the
opposing party has raised a dispute to the moving party’s fact, the moving party’s response (and
any supporting evidence) to rebut the opposing party’s contentions. For example:
Moving Party’s Uncontroverted Facts and
Supporting Evidence

Opposing Party’s Response to Cited Fact
and Supporting Evidence

1. The accident occurred on June 1, 2013,
at 1:30 p.m.

1. Undisputed

24
25
26
27
28

Evidence: Deposition of Defendant at page
5; Declaration of Witness A at ¶ 3.

1
2
3
4
5

2. The signal light was green in Defendant’s
direction when she entered into the
intersection and immediately before
Plaintiff’s vehicle “ran” the red light and
struck Defendant’s truck.

2. Disputed.
Immediately before the accident, the
light was green in Plaintiff’s direction and
Defendant ran the red light.
Evidence: 6/8/13 Deposition of Plaintiff at
page 10.

Evidence: 6/3/13 Deposition of Defendant at
page 6.

6

2. Moving Party’s Response

7

On Page 10 of his deposition, Plaintiff merely states that he “believes” the light was
green when he drove into the intersection. Also, on page 12, he admits that he had
consumed ten bottles of beer within one hour before the accident. Further, in the police
report prepared at the scene by Officer Green within one half hour of the accident, Plaintiff
admitted that he couldn’t recall if the light was green when he entered into the intersection.
See page 3 of Police Report No. A473501, attached as exhibit 101 to Defendant’s 6/3/13
Deposition.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

3.

Any evidentiary objections to materials filed in connection with summary judgment

motions (for which a party desires the Court to specifically make a ruling) shall be delineated in
a separate document (or documents) entitled "Request for Evidentiary Ruling on Specified
Objections." Each objection shall: (1) cite to the evidentiary item and state its precise location by
document name and Docket Number plus the page and line(s) where it appears, and (2) concisely
articulate the bases for the objection(s). Objections will only be raised as to evidence (not to
factual statements or factual characterizations in the opposing party's brief(s)). The Court will
disregard any evidentiary objection(s) that do not comply with this instruction.

20
21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23
24

DATED: July 12, 2019

GEORGE H. WU
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28
2