Solis v. Client Services, Inc. et al

Filing 117

ORDER denying 113 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Please see Order for details. Signed by Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum on 10/26/2012. (bon)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 11-23798-CIV-ROSENBAUM/SELTZER GRACE D. SOLIS, Plaintiff, v. CLIENT SERVICES, INC., CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA), N.A., PATRICK A. CAREY, P.A., PATRICK A. CAREY, ROBERT J. RIVERA, MAIRIM A. MORALES, Defendants. ________________________________________/ ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendants Patrick A. Carey, P.A., Patrick A. Carey, Robert J. Rivera, and Mairim Morales’s Motion for Summary Judgment [D.E. 113]. Plaintiff seeks to strike Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [D.E. 110] on the basis that Defendants failed to provide complete and timely discovery to Plaintiff.1 Rule 56(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., and this Court’s amended Scheduling Order permit a summary judgment motion to be filed at any time prior to the deadline set by the Court. Nothing in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or this Court’s Local Rules or Orders requires summary judgment motions 1 Plaintiff has also filed an Amended Motion to Compel Discovery [D.E. 111] and a Motion to Extend the Summary Judgment Deadline [D.E. 112]. The Motion to Compel is under consideration by the Honorable Barry S. Seltzer, Chief Magistrate Judge. The Motion to Extend the Summary Judgment Deadline will be considered by this Court after the discovery issue is resolved. to be filed after discovery. Similarly, no rule permits the Court to strike a motion for summary judgment merely because it has been served prior to discovery having been provided. If the absence of this discovery prevents Plaintiff from having the facts necessary to oppose Defendants’ Motion, Plaintiff can file an affidavit or declaration under Rule 56(d), Fed. R. Civ. P., setting forth the specific reasons why she cannot oppose Defendants’ Motion. The Court can then grant appropriate relief under the circumstances. However, the failure of Defendants to provide timely discovery responses by itself does not provide a basis for striking their Motion for Summary Judgment. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendants Patrick A. Carey, P.A., Patrick A. Carey, Robert J. Rivera, and Mairim Morales’s Motion for Summary Judgment [D.E. 113] is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED at Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 26th day of October 2012. ________________________________ ROBIN S. ROSENBAUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: Grace D. Solis, pro se 730 86th Street Miami Beach, FL 33141 Via U.S. Mail Counsel of record 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?