Wilson v. Astrue

Filing 15

ORDER striking 8 Motion for Summary Judgment and 9 Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff allowed twenty (20) days from the entry of this Order to submit a new motion and supporting brief. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 03/22/12. (emw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:11cv140
MICHAEL ALAN WILSON,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
_______________________________

ORDER

Pending before the Court are the parties’ Motions for Summary Judgment
[# 8 & # 13]. Recently, this Court warned counsel for Plaintiff in a Memorandum
and Recommendation entered in Pyles v. Astrue, as follows:
The Court notes that counsel for Plaintiff has numerous social security
appeals pending before the Court. In many of these cases, counsel has
filed similar briefs that lack citations to legal authority and fail to clearly
articulate the alleged errors committed by the ALJ. The Court warns
counsel that going forward, the Court will consider striking any brief
submitted by counsel in a social security case that does not separately set
forth each alleged error and contain legal authority supporting each of
the claimant's alleged errors.

Pyles v. Astrue, No. 1:11cv116, slip. op. at 6-7 n.2 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 19, 2012)
(Howell, Mag. J.). Plaintiff is represented by the same counsel in this case, V.
Lamar Gudger, III, Esq. Like in Pyles, Plaintiff’s Memorandum in Support of his
-1-

Motion for Summary Judgment fails to cite any legal authority supporting his
alleged errors. In fact, the entire legal analysis portion of Plaintiff’s brief, which
spans eight pages, fails to include a single citation to legal authority. Accordingly,
the Court STRIKES the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [# 8] and
Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment [# 9]. The Court,
however, will allow Plaintiff twenty (20) days from the entry of this Order to
submit a new motion and supporting brief. The Court will disregard any portion of
the brief that is not supported by citations to legal authority. No extension of this
deadline will be granted.
Moreover, the Court will not grant counsel any further extensions of time to
file his briefs in any Social Security cases pending before the Court in which he
represents the Plaintiff. If counsel cannot provide the Court with legal authority
supporting his arguments, then no extension of time is needed to research and draft
briefs with the Court. Finally, the Court INSTRUCTS counsel that the Court will
not allow counsel an opportunity to submit a new brief in any case in which the
brief was filed with the Court after the entry of this Order. Instead, the Court will
strike the motion and brief as a matter of course and recommend to the District
Court to dismiss without prejudice the complaint for failure to comply with a
lawful Order of this Court.

-2-

Signed: March 22, 2012

-3-