Crochet v. Barton et al

Filing 52

RULING granting 50 Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant Ohio Security Insurance Company is dismissed from this action with prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on 8/14/2019. (SWE)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

MARY CROCHET

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

18-150-SDD-RLB

JARED BARTON, DENNIS BARTON,
BARTON TRUCKING, INC., NATIONAL
INDEMNITY COMPANY, BOBBY BAILEY,
AND XYZ INSURANCE CO.
RULING
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment1 filed by
Defendant, Ohio Security Insurance Company (“Defendant”). No opposition to this
motion has been filed.
Local Rule 7(f) of the Middle District of Louisiana requires that memoranda in
opposition to a motion be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service of the motion.
Despite this rule, Plaintiff, Mary Crochet (“Plaintiff”) failed to timely oppose this motion.
Defendant’s motion was electronically filed on June 24, 2019. Under the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Court, Plaintiff was required to file an opposition
no later than July 15, 2019. At no time did Plaintiff request an extension of time to oppose
this motion.
Therefore, the pending motion is deemed to be unopposed and further, after
reviewing the record, the Court finds that the Motion has merit, particularly because

1

Rec. Doc. No. 50.

Document Number: 53035 
Page 1 

Defendant’s Statement of Undisputed Facts2 is uncontroverted, and the summary
judgment evidence submitted supports Defendant’s arguments.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment3 is GRANTED, and Defendant Ohio Security Insurance Company is dismissed
from this action with prejudice.
Any response to this Ruling, which should explain the Plaintiffs’ failure to comply
with the Court’s deadlines, based on the appropriate Federal Rule of Civil Procedure,
shall be filed within fourteen (14) days and must be accompanied by an opposition
memorandum to the original Motion.
On review of the pleadings filed along with the opposition, the Court, at its
discretion, may assess costs, including attorney’s fees, against the moving party, if the
Court deems that such a motion was unnecessary had a timely opposition memorandum
been filed.4 A statement of costs conforming to L.R. 54(c) shall be submitted by all parties
desiring to be awarded costs and attorney’s fees no later than seven (7) days prior to the
hearing on the newly filed motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 14th day of August, 2019.

S

________________________________
SHELLY D. DICK
CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

2

Rec. Doc. No. 50-2.
Rec. Doc. No. 48.
4
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, 83.
3

Document Number: 53035 
Page 2