Stewart v. Property and Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/13/2020 Plaintiff shall file opposition to the motion for summary judgment, or a statement of non-opposition on or before 9/17/2020. Defendant may file a written reply to plaintiff's opposition on or before 9/24/2020. Thereafter, the court will take this matter under submission without a hearing. (Kastilahn, A)
Case 2:17-cv-02418-TLN-KJN Document 68 Filed 08/14/20 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. 2:17–cv–2418–TLN–KJN PS
PROPERTY AND CASUALTY
INSURANCE CO. OF HARTFORD,
On June 19, 2020, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, and a hearing on this
motion was ultimately set for August 13, 2020. (ECF Nos. 61, 63.) Plaintiff failed to file
opposition to this motion, and so the court vacated the hearing and, given her pro se status,
provided her with additional time to respond. (ECF No. 64.) Simultaneously, plaintiff mailed to
the court a motion to continue, requesting an additional six months to prepare her case before the
summary judgment motion is taken up. (ECF No. 65.) Defendant opposed, noting plaintiff has
previously requested multiple extensions throughout the case, and noting she has known about
her prior attorney’s intent to withdraw since April 2019. (ECF No. 66.)
Given plaintiffs’ pro se status and the overlap between the court’s order and plaintiff’s
request, the court grants plaintiff a brief extension to prepare her opposition to defendant’s motion
for summary judgment. However, an extension of the length plaintiff requests cannot be granted.
Defendant is correct that plaintiff’s attorney moved to withdraw over a year and a half ago, and
Case 2:17-cv-02418-TLN-KJN Document 68 Filed 08/14/20 Page 2 of 2
plaintiff has known about defendant’s summary judgment motion since it was filed on June 19,
2020. The court sympathizes with plaintiff’s personal issues, but notes that plaintiff brought her
case in 2017 and has delayed it multiple times.
Thus, plaintiff’s opposition to defendant’s motion is now due by September 17, 2020.1
Defendant’s reply is due September 24, 2020, and the motion will be taken under submission
without a hearing after this date. Plaintiff should observe Local Rule 260 regarding her
opposition to the motion for summary judgment.2 Any further failure by plaintiff to oppose will
be construed as non-opposition to defendant’s motion, and no further extensions of time will be
granted on this motion.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
Plaintiff shall file a written opposition to the motion for summary judgment, or a
statement of non-opposition thereto, on or before September 17, 2020. No further
extensions will be granted. Plaintiff’s failure to file a written opposition will be
deemed a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion and consent to the
granting of the motion, and may constitute an additional ground for the imposition
of appropriate sanctions; and
Defendant may file a written reply to plaintiff’s opposition on or before September
24, 2020. Thereafter, the court will take this matter under submission without a
Dated: August 13, 2020
Given the court is under restricted access due to the current health crisis (See General Order
612), plaintiff may submit her filing by mail. Should plaintiff wish to submit her opposition in
person at the court, she is advised to bring a copy of this order with her—as the current general
order restricts public access to the facilities.
The Local Rules of the Eastern District of California are available on the court’s website, at
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?