Hunter v. City of Frostproof

Filing 7

ORDER: Defendant City of Frostproof's Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. # 5) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g). Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 2/17/2017. (KAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
ANTHONY HUNTER,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:17-cv-325-T-33TBM

CITY OF FROSTPROOF,
Defendant.
_________________________________/
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court pursuant to Defendant
City of Frostproof’s Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff’s
Complaint (Doc. # 5), which was filed on February 16, 2017.
The Motion fails to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g), M.D. Fla.,
which states in pertinent part:
Before filing any motion in a civil case, except a
motion for injunctive relief, for judgment on the
pleadings, for summary judgment, to dismiss or to
permit maintenance of a class action, to dismiss
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can
be granted, or to involuntarily dismiss an action,
the moving party shall confer with counsel for the
opposing party in a good faith effort to resolve
the issues raised by the motion, and shall file
with the motion a statement (1) certifying that the
moving counsel has conferred with opposing counsel
and (2) stating whether counsel agree on the
resolution of the motion. A certification to the
effect that opposing counsel was unavailable for a
conference before filing a motion is insufficient
to satisfy the parties’ obligation to confer. The
moving party retains the duty to contact opposing
counsel
expeditiously
after
filing
and
to
supplement the motion promptly with a statement
certifying whether or to what extent the parties
have resolved the issue(s) presented in the motion.

If the interested parties agree to all or part of
the relief sought in any motion, the caption of the
motion
shall
include
the
word
“unopposed,”
“agreed,” or “stipulated” or otherwise succinctly
inform the reader that, as to all or part of the
requested relief, no opposition exists.
Local Rule 3.01(g), M.D. Fla.
Since this is a removed case, the Court takes this
opportunity to clearly advise the parties that it expects full
compliance with the Local Rules of the Middle District of
Florida. As stated in Kindred Rehab Services, Inc. v. Florida
Convalescent Centers, Inc., 3:06-cv-218-J-33MCR, 2007 U.S.
Dist.

LEXIS

42064,

*2

(M.D.

Fla.

June

11,

2007):

“The

importance of the Local Rules cannot be overstated.

All

counsel are expected to be familiar with and comply with all
applicable rules of this Court.

The purpose of Local Rule

3.01(g) ‘is to require the parties to communicate and resolve
certain types of disputes without court intervention.’” Id.
(citing Desai v. Tire Kingdom, Inc., 944 F. Supp. 876 (M.D.
Fla. 1996)).
This Court denies the Motion without prejudice due to the
City’s failure to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g), M.D. Fla.
The City may file an amended motion in compliance with the
Local Rules of the Middle District of Florida, particularly

-2-

Local

Rule

3.01(g),

M.D.

Fla.,

if

the

circumstances

so

warrant.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that:
Defendant City of Frostproof’s Motion to Strike Portions
of

Plaintiff’s

Complaint

(Doc.

#

5)

is

DENIED

WITHOUT

PREJUDICE for failure to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g).
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this
17th day of February, 2017.

-3-