Herr v. Cornhusker Farms et al

Filing 92

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr. granting Plaintiff's 34 Motion for Summary Judgment as to Defendants Cornhusker Farms and James Husbys counterclaim. (BG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Glenn Herr,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Cornhusker Farms; James Husby,
individually; and Zylstra Investigations,
LLC,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

Case No. 1:15-cv-174

Before the court is Glenn Herr’ Motion for Summary Judgment, (Docket No. 34), wherein
Herr seeks summary judgment as to Defendants Cornhusker Farms and James Husby’s counterclaim
for conversion. (Docket No. 9). In the current motion, Herr argues summary judgment is
appropriate because the undisputed material facts of this case show the allegedly misappropriated
truckload of soybeans have been accounted for. (Docket No. 35).
The Local Rules provide, in relevant part, that the adverse party has 21 days after service of
a dispositive motion to file a response. See D.N.D. Civ. L.R. 7.1(A)(1). Failure to do so may
subject the motion to summary ruling and may be deemed an admission that the motion is well
taken. See D.N.D. Civ. L.R. 7.1(A)(3) and (F). More than four months has lapsed since Herr filed
his motion. Defendants Cornhusker Farms and James Husby have yet to file a response. Their
failure to timely respond is deemed an admission under the Local Rules that the motion is well
taken.
Accordingly, Herr’s motion (Docket No. 34) is GRANTED. Defendant Cornhusker Farms
and James Husby’s counterclaim is DISMISSED with prejudice.

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 27th day of March, 2017.
/s/ Charles S. Miller, Jr.
Charles S. Miller, Jr., Magistrate Judge
United States District Court

2