Mitchell v. City of Jacksonville, Florida et al

Filing 40

SUMMARY Judgment Notice re: 39 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Deputy Clerk on 12/1/2016. (RH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
ERIC MITCHELL,
Plaintiff,
-vs-

Case No. 3:15-cv-1211-J-20JRK

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA; GAIL
LOPUT, individually; AND KURT WILSON,
individually,
Defendants.
_____________________________________/

SUMMARY JUDGMENT NOTICE
Motion(s) for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, have been filed in this case. Unless the Court notifies the parties otherwise,
there will not be a hearing on these motion(s); instead, the Court will decide the motion(s)
on the basis of the motion(s), responses, briefs or legal memoranda, and evidentiary
materials filed by the parties. Unless otherwise specifically ordered by the Court, any
response to these motion(s), as well as all supporting evidentiary materials (counteraffidavits, depositions, exhibits, etc.) must be filed with the Clerk of this Court in
accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court will consider these
motion(s) ripe for review twenty-one (21) days from the date of the filing of the motion(s).1
The following explanatory admonitions are included here for the benefit of pro se
parties (i.e., parties not represented by an attorney) who oppose the summary judgment
motion(s). In addition to the above paragraph, you are also advised that if the Court

1

If the motion is served electronically or by mail, the parties have an additional three
consecutive mailing days to file a response. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(e).

grants the motion(s) for summary judgment, such would be a final decision of the Court
in favor of the party filing the motion(s) (“the movant”). As a result of such final decision,
there would be no trial or other proceedings in this case, and you would likely be precluded
from later litigating this matter or any related matters. Therefore, you are hereby further
advised: (1) failing to respond to these motion(s) will indicate that the motion(s) are not
opposed; (2) all material facts asserted by the movant in the motion(s) will be considered
to be admitted by you unless controverted by proper evidentiary materials (counteraffidavits, depositions, exhibits, etc.) filed by you; and (3) you may not rely solely on the
allegations of the issue pleadings (e.g., complaint, answer, etc.) in opposing these
motion(s). See Griffith v. Wainwright, 772 F.2d 822,825 (11th Cir. 1985).

FOR THE COURT

Date: January 5, 2017
By:

Copies to:
Counsel of Record
Pro Se Party(s), if any

-2-

Robin Hall, Deputy Clerk