Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Hill

Filing 115

ORDER that defendants are directed to respond to within 14 days of issuance of this order; Mass Mutual may reply within 7 days of filing of response re (106 in 4:15-cv-00184-DMB-JMV) MOTION to Dismiss (MassMutual's Response to Court' ;s December 6, 2017 Order and Renewed Motion to Dismiss) filed by Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, (100 in 4:15-cv-00184-DMB-JMV) MOTION for Summary Judgment Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company. Signed by District Judge Debra M. Brown on 4/5/18. Associated Cases: 4:15-cv-00166-DMB-JMV, 4:15-cv-00184-DMB-JMV (tab)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAINTIFF V. NO. 4:15-CV-166-DMB-JMV PURVIS WILLIAM HILL, JR. DEFENDANT CONSOLIDATED WITH PURVIS WILLIAM HILL, JR. PLAINTIFF V. NO. 4:15-CV-184-DMB-JMV DEFENDANTS MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; and JOHN DOES 1–3 ORDER On November 7, 2017, Candace L. Williamson and Sammy J. Ellis, co-executors of the Estate of Purvis William Hill, Jr., were substituted for Hill as litigants in these consolidated actions. Doc. #101. On December 5, 2017, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (“Mass Mutual”) filed a renewed motion for summary judgment. Doc. #108. Approximately two weeks later, Mass Mutual filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Doc. #114. Neither Williamson (who has been sanctioned repeatedly in this action)1 nor Ellis responded to either motion. Given the complexity of the issues presented by Mass Mutual’s motions, Williamson and Ellis are DIRECTED to respond to the motion to dismiss and the motion for summary judgment 1 See Doc. #112 at 1–5. within fourteen (14) days of the issuance of this order.2 Failure to respond to the motions within the time allowed will likely result in case dispositive sanctions. See Custer v. Pan. Am. Life Ins. Co., 12 F.3d 410, 415 (4th Cir. 1993) (“If the court were to determine that the plaintiff’s failure to respond constituted a failure to prosecute, then it could dismiss the action.”); Lediju v. N.Y. City Dep’t of Sanitation, 173 F.R.D. 105, 110 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (“[A] summary judgment motion may be granted by default if the facts justify a dismissal for failure to prosecute.”) (collecting cases); Peck v. NAES Corp., 307 F.R.D. 43, 45–46 (D.D.C. 2014) (where plaintiffs twice failed to respond to motion for summary judgment, their “failure to prosecute their case supplie[d] an independent basis for the Court to dismiss”). No extensions of the response deadline will be granted in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. SO ORDERED, this 5th day of April, 2018. /s/Debra M. Brown UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2 Mass Mutual may reply in support of its motions within seven (7) days of the relevant response. 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?