UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GANT

Filing 23

ORDER - Plaintiff's 18 MOTION for Summary Judgment will be taken under advisement on February 19, 2008. Parties to file and serve affidavits, etc prior to above date. Internal deadline for referral to judge if response not filed earlier: 2/19/2008. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE MILES DAVIS on February 1, 2008.(cc: Gant) (cbj)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GANT

Doc. 23

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION UNIT ED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. HORACE A. GANT, Defendants. Case No: 3:07cv50/RV/MD

ORDER AND NOTICE Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (doc. 18) will be taken under advisement by the undersigned on February 19, 2008. Because the court does not contemplate scheduling a hearing on this motion, the parties are directed to file and serve affidavits and any other documents or materials authorized to be filed under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this court's Local Rules prior to the above date.1 Only those pleadings and evidentiary materials currently in the record or filed prior to the above date will be considered by the court in ruling on this motion. A motion for summary judgment will result in a final judgment being entered for the moving party (in this case the United States) if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions, affidavits, and any other appropriate evidentiary materials properly filed in the record show that there is no genuine
I f defendant Ga n t files an ad d i t i o n a l respons e to the motion, such response should include affidavits and a n y other docum e n t s or materials required by FED.R.C IV .P. 56 and Local R ule 56.1(A). Defendant is c a u t io n e d that he must dispute or contradict plaintiff's argument with evidence of a substantial nature as d i s ti n g u is h e d from legal conclusions. Defendant cannot successfully defeat a motion for summ a r y judgment w i t h mere formal denials or general allegations that do not disclose the fac ts in detail and with precision, nor c a n he simply rely upon the pleadings. A general denial unaccompanied by any evidentiary support will not s u f f i c e . See e.g., Courson v. McMillian, 939 F.2d 1479 (11th Cir. 1991); Hutton v. Strickland, 919 F.2d 1531 ( 1 1 th Cir. 1991). E v i d e n t i a r y m ate ria l whic h is acceptable in opposition to a motion for summ a r y judgment includes s w o r n affidavits or other sworn docum e n t a r y or other evidence indicating the existence of a genuine issue of m a t e r i a l fact. F E D . R . C IV . P . 56(e). Affidavits must be based on personal knowledge, setting forth s u c h facts a s wou l d be a d m i s s i b l e into evidence and affirmatively showing that the affiant is com p e t e n t to testify to the m a t t e r s stated therein. FED.R.C IV . P . 56(e ) .
1

Dockets.Justia.com

Page 2 of 2

issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. FED. R. CIV. P. 56; Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S. Ct. 2548, 2553-54, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265 (1986). DONE AND ORDERED this 1st day of February, 2008. /s/

Miles Davis
MILES DAVIS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case No: 3:07cv50/RV/MD