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)

Download PDF
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-

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?