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)
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?