Steelman v. City of Salem

Filing 55

ORDER re: 53 HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 53 ) is GRANTED in part, and Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. An appropriate Order of Dismissal will accompany this Order.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 53 ) isDENIED in all other respects. Signed by District Judge Jean C. Hamilton on 06/14/2013. (CLK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

CONNIE STEELMAN,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
CITY OF SALEM,
Defendant(s).

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:12CV191 JCH

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions, filed on June 6, 2013.
(ECF No. 53). By way of background, the Court previously set this matter for trial on Monday, June
24, 2013. (ECF No. 46). The parties had been ordered to file the following by June 4, 20131: 1) a
Joint Stipulation of uncontested facts, 2) lists of proposed witnesses, 3) lists of all exhibits to be
offered into evidence at trial, 4) lists of interrogatory answers, parts of depositions, and requests for
admissions proposed to be offered into evidence at trial, 5) proposed findings of fact and conclusions
of law, and 6) trial briefs. (ECF Nos. 20, 46). The Court warned that failure to file these documents
might result in the imposition of sanctions. (ECF No. 20).
As noted in Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions, Plaintiff has failed to file any of these
documents. Plaintiff has also failed to respond to Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions, and the time
for filing a response has now passed. See Local Rule 7-4.01(B). In light of the foregoing, the Court
will grant Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions in part and will order the dismissal of Plaintiff’s
Complaint.

1

More specifically, the parties were ordered to file their pretrial documents no less than
twenty (20) days prior to the trial date. See ECF No. 20, p. 2.

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 53) is
GRANTED in part, and Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. An appropriate
Order of Dismissal will accompany this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 53) is
DENIED in all other respects.

Dated this 14th day of June, 2013.

/s/ Jean C. Hamilton
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-