Cooper et al v. Clark County Nevada et al

Filing 86

ORDER Striking documents ## 69 , 70 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 81 , 82 , 84 and 85 and Denying without prejudice 66 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall file a Motion for Summary Judgment by 5/14/2014. Responses due by 5/28/2014. Replies due by 6/4/2014. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 04/29/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

DAVID COOPER, et al.,

8
9
10
11

Case No. 2:10-CV-763-KJD-GWF

Plaintiffs,
v.
CLARK COUNTY NEVADA, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13

Before the Court is Clark County Nevada et al.’s (Defendants) Motion for Summary

14

Judgment (#66). Defendants subsequently filed two different errata (##69, 70) to this motion.

15

Plaintiffs responded (#73), and then filed a “Declaration” regarding Defendants’ Motion (#74),

16

followed by a list of exhibits to that “Declaration” (#75). Plaintiffs then filed a second

17

“Declaration” (#76) followed by exhibits to that declaration (#77), and also responded a second

18

time to Defendants’ motion (#78). Defendants then responded to one of Plaintiffs’

19

“Declarations” (#81), replied to Plaintiffs’ response (#82), responded to Plaintiffs’ other

20

“Declaration” (#84), and then replied a second time to Plaintiffs’ second response (#85). All of

21

these except the underlying motion were filed within a six week period. Now that the parties

22

have paused to catch their breath, the Court will address them.

23

Such blatant disregard for the both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court’s

24

Local Rules is inexcusable and will not be tolerated further. In fact, review of the documents and

25

practices referenced above gives the Court strong evidence of Rule 11 violations. The parties are

26

on notice that further violations will be dealt with under Rule 11.

1

Should the parties feel the need to supplement their motions, they must do so in

2

accordance with both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court’s Local Rules. In

3

particular, the parties may file the enumerated pleadings found in Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a), or they

4

may file motions under Rule 7(b). There is no provision for the independent filing of

5

“Declarations.” Whatever evidence is required for the resolution of the motion should be filed as

6

an exhibit to the motion, the response, or the reply. If a motion is filed, then a single response is

7

permitted, followed by a single reply. Local Rule 7-2. Any sur-responses or sur-replies must be

8

permitted by the Court, based upon a proper motion. Further, the rules governing Motions for

9

Summary Judgment are straightforward, and found in Rule 56, and Local Rule 56-1. The Court

10

strongly encourages the parties to review these and all other relevant Federal and Local Rules.

11

The parties apparently feel that their motion, responses, and replies are thoroughly

12

deficient, requiring extensive supplementation and correction. The Court cannot disagree.

13

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY STRIKES documents ## 69, 70, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 81,

14

82, 84 and 85. The Court HEREBY DENIES without prejudice Defendants’ Motion for

15

Summary Judgment (#66).

16

The Court also HEREBY ORDERS the following:

17

1. Defendants will file a single procedurally and substantively correct and complete

18
19
20

Motion for Summary Judgment on or before May 14, 2014.
2. Plaintiffs will file a single procedurally and substantively correct and complete
response on or before May 28, 2014.

21

3. Defendants will file a single procedurally and substantively correct and complete reply

22

on or before June 4, 2014. While motions for summary judgment typically receive longer

23

timeframes for filings, the parties have already prepared all of the material to be submitted. The

24

only task before the parties is to winnow irrelevant and improper material and distill the

25

remainder into a single filing. Accordingly, the abbreviated timeframe is generous and

26

warranted.

2

1
2

4. All filings are to be in a searchable PDF format. Filings which the Court cannot search
electronically will be stricken as improper.

3
4

DATED this 29th day of April 2014.

5
6

_____________________________
Kent J. Dawson
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

3