LAC La Belle Amie Vineyard & Winery, LLC et al v. Calcareous Vineyards, LLC

Filing 39

ORDER Striking 37 Response, 32 OBJECTIONS to Plaintiffs' Statement of Facts. A hearing on the parties' pending Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. Nos. 21, 23) and Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 28) set for Wednesday, May 29, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. Signed by District Judge Frank D. Whitney on 5/15/2013. (tmg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:12-cv-00316-FDW-DSC
LAC BELLE AMIE VINEYARD &
WINERY, LLC; LA BELLE AMIE,
LLC and CHARLES VICKI
WEIGLE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
CALCAREOUS VINEYARDS, LLC,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER
and
NOTICE OF HEARING

THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte following Defendant’s filing of a
document entitled “Objections to Plaintiffs’ Statement of Facts” (Doc. No. 32). Defendant
apparently filed this in response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 21).
Notably, on the same day, Defendant filed a document entitled “Defendant Calcareous
Vineyards’ Brief in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment” (Doc. No. 30).
Under the standing orders governing this case, including the Case Management Order
entered September 11, 2012, (Doc. No. 13), responses in opposition to dispositive motions shall
not exceed 6,000 words. (Doc. No. 13, p. 7). Although Defendant’s response in opposition to
Plaintiffs’ motion does not contain a certification of compliance with the word count limit, the
Court has informally estimated the word count to be close to the 6,000 word limit. In any event,
collectively, the response in opposition (Doc. No. 30) and the miscellaneous filing in Document
Number 32 certainly exceed the acceptable word count limit for Defendant to respond to
Plaintiff’s motion. In sum, Defendant’s supplemental document (Doc. No. 32) does not comply

with the Court’s standing orders because it appears to be an attempt to evade the word count
limit for responses to dispositive motions.
Accordingly, the Court hereby STRIKES Document Number 32 from the record in this
case. The Court will wholly disregard the contents of that document. In response, Plaintiffs
filed a miscellaneous document (Doc. No. 37) that questions the nature of Defendant’s
supplemental filing but also responds to the arguments made by Defendant therein. The Court
hereby STRIKES that pleading (Doc. No. 37) as well.
Counsel is expected to immediately familiarize themselves with the Standing Orders of
this Court and is cautioned that further failure to adhere to those orders could result in sanctions
and/or fines. In addition, defense counsel should attach a certificate of compliance with the word
count limit to all future filings in this matter.
TAKE NOTICE that a hearing on the parties’ pending Motions for Summary Judgment
(Docs. Nos. 21, 23) and Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 28) will take place before the
undersigned on Wednesday, May 29, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom #1 of the Charles R. Jonas
Federal Building, 401 West Trade Street, Charlotte, North Carolina, 28202. Oral arguments will
be limited to 20 minutes for each side on all motions collectively . The parties may allocate their
20 minutes as they so wish.
Signed: May 15, 2013