Hoffman v. Goodman, Jr.
ORDER denying without prejudice the 24 Motion in Limine. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 8/14/2017. (kby)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
1:16 CV 001
HUGH M. GOODMAN, JR.,
THIS MATTER is before the undersigned pursuant to Defendant Hugh M.
Goodman, Jr.’s Motion in Limine (#24). An examination of the motion does not
show that counsel for Plaintiff was consulted, nor was there a brief filed in support
of Defendant’s motion. LCvR 7.1(B) and (C) states as follows:
(B) Requirement of Consultation. Any motions other than for
dismissal, summary judgment, or default judgment shall show that
counsel have conferred or attempted to confer and have attempted in
good faith to resolve areas of disagreement and set forth which issues
(C) Requirement of Briefs. Briefs shall be filed contemporaneously
with the motion, except no brief is required in support of timely motions
for extension of time, continuances, admission pro hac vice, or early
discovery. Exhibits in support of a brief shall be attached as appendices
as specified in the Administrative Procedures. Factual contentions shall
be supported as specifically as possible by citation to exhibit number
Due to the failure of Defendant to consult and file a brief in support of the
motion, the motion will be denied without prejudice. The Defendant will be allowed
up to and including August 18, 2017 to file any motion which would comply with
the Local Rules.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendant Hugh M. Goodman Jr.’s
Motion in Limine (#24) is DENIED without prejudice.
Signed: August 14, 2017
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?