Peralta v. Epic Diving & Marine Services, LLC

Filing 29

ORDER denying 17 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Lance M Africk. (car, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA DANILO PERALTA CIVIL ACTION VERSUS No. 10-4322 EPIC DIVING & MARINE SERVICES, LLC SECTION “I” ORDER Before the Court is a motion1 for partial summary judgment filed by defendant, Epic Diving & Marine Services, LLC (“Epic Diving”). Plaintiff, Danilo Peralta (“Peralta”), opposes2 Epic Diving’s motion. Epic Diving argues that it is entitled to partial summary judgment with respect to maintenance and cure payments regarding Peralta’s alleged knee injury because Peralta’s claim is barred by the McCorpen defense.3 Epic Diving’s argument largely turns on the contents of Peralta’s medical records.4 However, none of the medical records from Peralta’s treating physicians submitted to this Court are authenticated.5 Accordingly, the Court lacks the competent summary judgment evidence necessary to resolve Epic Diving’s motion and there remain genuine issues of material fact. See, e.g., Frazier v. Cinemark USA, Inc., 348 Fed. App’x 6, 8 (5th Cir. 2009); King v. Dogan, 31 F.3d 344, 346 (5th Cir. 1994) (“Unauthenticated documents are improper as summary judgment evidence.”). 1 R. Doc. No. 17. R. Doc. No. 19. 3 R. Doc. No. 17, p. 1. See McCorpen v. Central Gulf Steamship Corp., 396 F.2d 547 (5th Cir. 1968). 4 R. Doc. No. 26, pp. 6-8. 5 The affidavit provided by Sharon B. Estopinal only authenticates Peralta’s General Physical Form completed May 13, 2010, at West Jefferson Industrial Medicine, LLC. R. Doc. No. 17-5, p. 5. 2 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Epic Diving’s partial motion for summary judgment is DENIED. 29th New Orleans, Louisiana, August _____, 2011. __________________________________ LANCE M. AFRICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?