Jeffrey v. Simms et al
Filing
37
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER held in abeyance 34 Motion for Summary Judgment; see order for specifics. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell on 9/24/2012. cc:counsel (KJA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
LOUISVILLE DIVISION
Case No. 3:10-CV-332
RICHARD JEFFREY,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
ANN SIMMS, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Ann Simms and Deborah Skaggs have moved for summary judgment (DN
34) on the basis of qualified immunity and their limited factual involvement in the incidents that
form the basis for Plaintiff’s claims under 42 U.S.C § 1983, 42 U.S.C § 1985, and Kentucky
state law. In his response, Plaintiff requested that the Court delay its consideration of
Defendants’ motion until further discovery can be completed (DN 35). At this point, the Court
holds consideration of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment IN ABEYANCE to allow
Plaintiff additional time to complete the depositions of Defendants Simms and Skaggs and other
such discovery that will enable him to respond to Defendants’ motion.
Under Rule 56(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if a party faced with a motion
for summary judgment establishes by affidavit specific reasons why that party presently cannot
respond with facts essential to support its opposition, then the District Court may either deny the
dispositive motion, order that a continuance be had so that discovery may be completed, or issue
any other order it deems just. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f).
To his response, Plaintiff’s counsel attaches an affidavit that outlines the medical issues
he has faced over the course of this litigation that have led to the delay in conducting discovery
(DN 35-1). Defendants’ argument that, in light of the length of time that has passed in this case,
Plaintiff has had sufficient time to conduct discovery is well-taken. However, in light of
counsel’s medical issues, the Court is reluctant to grant summary judgment before Plaintiff has
been afforded the opportunity to complete discovery in this matter. THEREFORE,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is GRANTED AN EXTENSION to complete
discovery until December 1, 2012. Further, Plaintiff has until December 15, 2012, to file any
responsive memorandum and exhibits to the pending motion. Until that time, Defendants’
Motion for Summary Judgment (DN 34) is HELD IN ABEYANCE. Plaintiff is to notify the
Court by letter when the motion is ripe for its review, sending copies of such correspondence to
opposing counsel.
September 24, 2012
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?