Ferguson v. Waid

Filing 54

MINUTE ORDER striking the following documents: 42 , 43 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , and 52 . Defendant need not respond to Ms. Ferguson's 42 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment by the previous noting date. If Ms. Ferguson chooses to proceed with this Motion, she must refile according to the procedures in this order. Authorized by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (PM)

Download PDF
  1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 SANDRA L. FERGUSON, Plaintiff, v. Case No. C17-1685RSM MINUTE ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIAN J. WAID AND THE WAID MARITAL COMMUNITY, 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Defendants. The following MINUTE ORDER is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez, Chief United States District Judge: On March 20, 2018, Plaintiff Sandra Ferguson filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in this case. Dkt. #42. Ms. Ferguson attached a declaration, Dkt. #42-1, and 28 exhibits to this filing, Dkts. #42-2 through #42-29. These exhibits were titled Exhibits A 22 through Z, except Exhibit A was broken into three parts, and totaled 1,911 pages. That same 23 day, Ms. Ferguson filed further exhibits totalling 639 pages. Dkts. #43 and #43-1 through #43- 24 25 26 16. These were titled Exhibits 1 through 8 and Appendix 1 through 11, although Appendix 1 through 3 were filed in one document. Two days later, on March 22, 2018, Ms. Ferguson filed 27 a “Second Declaration of Sandra L. Ferguson” that relists Exhibits A through Z and 1 through 8 28 and appears to withdraw Exhibit 8 and Exhibit Z and replace Exhibit Y with a corrected MINUTE ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 1   1 version. Dkt. #48. An hour later that same day, Ms. Ferguson filed a “Third Declaration of 2 Sandra L. Ferguson,” that states “[a]ttached hereto are true copies of the following documents 3 which comprise the Appendix Parts 1 through 11…” however there are no attached documents. 4 Dkt. #49. 5 6 7 8 Declaration of Sandra L. Ferguson” that appears to withdraw Dkts. #48 and #48-1 and replace exhibits U through Y. Dkt #50. Just minutes later, Ms. Ferguson filed another “Fourth Declaration of Sandra L. Ferguson” that begins: 9 I filed Docket 50 (main document) with attachments 51-1, 51-2, 51-3, 51-4, and 51-5 attached thereto. There was a problem with Docket 50, only. Therefore, this document is submitted as a replacement for Dkt. 50. I hereby withdraw the previously-filed docket #50, but I do not withdraw the attachments 1-5 to docket 50, which belong with this replacement documents declaration. 10 11 12 13 The following day, March 23, 2018, Ms. Ferguson filed an 85-page “Fourth Dkt. #51. 14 15 The above filings have created significant confusion for the Court and likely any person 16 attempting to decipher what is and is not an exhibit in support of Ms. Ferguson’s Motion. The 17 Court also notes several procedural errors with these filings. Ms. Ferguson has not followed 18 the Court’s praecipe procedure for filing corrections or additions to the record, see LCR 7(m). 19 Ms. Ferguson has submitted several of the above declarations without signing them under 20 21 penalty of perjury as required by this Court. See Dkts. #48, #49, and #51. Perhaps most 22 critically, Ms. Ferguson’s underlying Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is not signed by 23 Ms. Ferguson as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a). See Dkt. #42 at 25. 24 25 26 27 28 After the drafting of this Minute Order but before it was posted, Ms. Ferguson filed yet another correction, styled as a praecipe, asking the Clerk of the Court to replace Dkt. #42-1 with an attached amended declaration. Dkt. #52. This filing makes no mention of the above additional filings, and fails to explain why Ms. Ferguson is correcting her filings daily. MINUTE ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 2   1 Given all of the above, the Court hereby STRIKES all of the above filings (Dkts. #42, 2 #43, #48, #49, #50, #51, and #52). Defendant need not respond to Ms. Ferguson’s Motion for 3 Partial Summary Judgment by the previous noting date. If Ms. Ferguson chooses to proceed 4 with this Motion, she must refile according to the following procedures: 5 6 7 1) Ms. Ferguson’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment must be signed and noted for consideration based on the new filing date; 8 2) Ms. Ferguson must file a new declaration attaching the corrected versions of all of her 9 supporting exhibits A through Z, a separate declaration attaching the corrected versions 10 11 12 of her numbered exhibits, and a separate declaration attaching the corrected version of her appendix exhibits; 13 3) Every declaration must be made under penalty of perjury; 14 4) Ms. Ferguson is not permitted to file any further praecipes related to this Motion 15 without leave of the Court, see LCR 7(m) ([p]arties are expected to file accurate, 16 complete documents, and the failure to do so may result in the court’s refusal to 17 18 consider later filed corrections or additions to the record); 19 5) Ms. Ferguson need not refile the declaration of Kany M. Levine, Dkt. #44; 20 6) Ms. Ferguson must provide a courtesy copy to the Court of all new filings a day after 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 filing as required by LCR 10(e)(9). Failure to follow the above rules will result in the Court striking this Motion again. DATED this 26th day of March, 2018. WILLIAM McCOOL, Clerk By: /s/ Paula McNabb Deputy Clerk 28 MINUTE ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 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?