STEWART v. MOSES et al
ORDER for Response to Motion re: 6 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by CHAD WYNN, MICHAEL MOSES. Ordered by U.S. District Judge HUGH LAWSON on 4/14/2014. (nbp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Civil Action No. 7:14-CV-34 (HL)
MICHAEL STEWART and,
Defendants Michael Stewart and Chad Wynn filed a joint Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings on April 11, 2014, requesting that Plaintiff’s claims be
dismissed. The Court directs Plaintiff to respond to Defendants’ Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings pursuant to the dictates of the following notice:
The Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. Accordingly, the Court deems it
appropriate and necessary to advise him of his right to respond to said Motion
and of the consequences he may suffer if he fails to file a response thereto.
The Court advises Plaintiff that:
(1) a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings has been filed by Defendants;
(2) Plaintiff has the right to oppose the granting of said Motion; and
(3) if Plaintiff fails to oppose said Motion, his Complaint may be dismissed.
The Court further advises Plaintiff that under the procedures and policies
of this Court, motions to dismiss typically are decided on briefs. The Court
considers the pleadings and briefs filed by the parties in deciding whether
dismissal is appropriate under the law.
Failure of the Plaintiff to respond to Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on
the Pleadings, therefore, may result in the granting of the Motion. There would be
no trial or further proceedings.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff is ordered and directed to file a response to said
Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings BY NO LATER THAN MAY 5, 2014.
Thereafter, the Court will consider the Motion and any opposition filed by Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED, this 14th day of April, 2014.
s/ Hugh Lawson_______________
HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE
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?