Barlow v. Forrest County Sheriff's Department et al

Filing 88

ORDER denying 83 Defendants' Motion to Strike. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker on November 20, 2009. (KM)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI HATTIESBURG DIVISION CHARLES ROBERT BARLOW, # 10098-043 V. FORREST COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT., ET AL. ORDER THIS MATTER is before the court on the Defendants' Motion to Strike [83] Plaintiff's Opposition [82] to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [79] as untimely. Having considered the motion and the applicable law, the court finds that the motion should be denied. Defendants correctly note that Plaintiff was granted an extension of time until October 22, 2009, to respond to their Motion for Summary Judgment [79]. While Plaintiff's response was not "filed" until October 29, 2009, his response was signed and dated October 15, 2009, which makes it timely under the mail box rule. See Response [82][86]; Richardson v. Thornton, 299 F. App'x 461, 463 (5th Cir. 2008). Moreover, pro se litigants' pleadings are entitled to liberal construction and are held to less stringent standards. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED: That Defendants' Motion to Strike [83] is DENIED. SO ORDERED this the 20th day of November, 2009. s/ Michael T. Parker United States Magistrate Judge PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08cv31-MTP DEFENDANTS

1