Stewart v. Property and Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford

Filing 68

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
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

COLLEEN STEWART,

12
13
14
15
16
17

Plaintiff,

No. 2:17–cv–2418–TLN–KJN PS
ORDER

v.
PROPERTY AND CASUALTY
INSURANCE CO. OF HARTFORD,
Defendant.
On June 19, 2020, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, and a hearing on this

18

motion was ultimately set for August 13, 2020. (ECF Nos. 61, 63.) Plaintiff failed to file

19

opposition to this motion, and so the court vacated the hearing and, given her pro se status,

20

provided her with additional time to respond. (ECF No. 64.) Simultaneously, plaintiff mailed to

21

the court a motion to continue, requesting an additional six months to prepare her case before the

22

summary judgment motion is taken up. (ECF No. 65.) Defendant opposed, noting plaintiff has

23

previously requested multiple extensions throughout the case, and noting she has known about

24

her prior attorney’s intent to withdraw since April 2019. (ECF No. 66.)

25

Given plaintiffs’ pro se status and the overlap between the court’s order and plaintiff’s

26

request, the court grants plaintiff a brief extension to prepare her opposition to defendant’s motion

27

for summary judgment. However, an extension of the length plaintiff requests cannot be granted.

28

Defendant is correct that plaintiff’s attorney moved to withdraw over a year and a half ago, and
1

Case 2:17-cv-02418-TLN-KJN Document 68 Filed 08/14/20 Page 2 of 2
1

plaintiff has known about defendant’s summary judgment motion since it was filed on June 19,

2

2020. The court sympathizes with plaintiff’s personal issues, but notes that plaintiff brought her

3

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

4
5

Defendant’s reply is due September 24, 2020, and the motion will be taken under submission

6

without a hearing after this date. Plaintiff should observe Local Rule 260 regarding her

7

opposition to the motion for summary judgment.2 Any further failure by plaintiff to oppose will

8

be construed as non-opposition to defendant’s motion, and no further extensions of time will be

9

granted on this motion.

10

ORDER

11

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

12

1.

Plaintiff shall file a written opposition to the motion for summary judgment, or a

13

statement of non-opposition thereto, on or before September 17, 2020. No further

14

extensions will be granted. Plaintiff’s failure to file a written opposition will be

15

deemed a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion and consent to the

16

granting of the motion, and may constitute an additional ground for the imposition

17

of appropriate sanctions; and

18

2.

Defendant may file a written reply to plaintiff’s opposition on or before September

19

24, 2020. Thereafter, the court will take this matter under submission without a

20

hearing.

21

Dated: August 13, 2020

22
stew.2418

23
24
1

25
26
27
28

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
http://www.caed.uscourts.gov/caednew/index.cfm/rules/local-rules/
2
2