Briggs v. Blomkamp et al

Filing 73

ORDER re 63 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Steve Kenyatta Wilson Briggs. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 8/4/2014. (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 7 STEVE WILSON BRIGGS, Plaintiff, 8 9 v. ORDER NEILL BLOMKAMP, et al., 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C 13-4679 PJH Defendants. _______________________________/ 12 13 Plaintiff Steve Wilson Briggs filed a motion for summary judgment on July 30, 2014. 14 The court previously advised plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, of the requirements of 15 summary judgment motions. See First Notice of Filing of Motion for Summary Judgment 16 (Doc. 38) filed April 17, 2014. Of particular relevance here, the Notice advised that motions 17 for summary judgment must be properly supported by specific facts set forth in 18 declarations, depositions, answers to interrogatories, or authenticated documents. See 19 Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). If a party fails to comply with this requirement, the court may "provide 20 the party an opportunity to properly support or address the fact." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). 21 22 Plaintiff's motion consists of a memorandum of points and authorities, to which is 23 attached fifteen exhibits. One of the exhibits consists of four declarations, which can stand 24 on their own. However, the remaining exhibits do not constitute admissible evidence either 25 because they are not authenticated or because they are not attached to a proper request 26 for judicial notice. "A trial court can only consider admissible evidence in ruling on a motion 27 for summary judgment." Orr v. Bank of America, NT & SA, 285 F.3d 764, 773 (9th Cir. 28 2002). "Authentication is a 'condition precedent to admissibility." Id. "To satisfy the 1 requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must 2 produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it 3 is." Fed. R. Evid. 901(a). 4 In a summary judgment motion, documents and other evidence may be 5 authenticated through personal knowledge, if they are attached to an affidavit or declaration 6 that meets the requirements of Rule 56(c) (affidavit or declaration made on personal 7 knowledge, setting out facts that would be admissible in evidence, and showing that the 8 affiant or declarant is competent to testify on the matters stated). That is, the declaration 9 must identify the document or other evidence, and must state that the declarant has personal knowledge of the document. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 Alternatively, for matters that are subject to judicial notice – those "generally known 12 within the trial court's jurisdiction," and those that "can accurately and readily be 13 determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned" – the 14 documents may be attached to a separate request for judicial notice. See Fed. R. Evid. 15 201. 16 No later than August 6, 2014, plaintiff must file a declaration under penalty of perjury 17 authenticating the documents attached to the complaint, or as to any that are subject to 18 judicial notice, a request for judicial notice. 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: August 4, 2014 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?