Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ndulue v. Fremont-Rideout Health Group

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 5, 2010

CHUKWUEMEKA NDULUE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
FREMONT-RIDEOUT HEALTH GROUP; LEONARD MARKS; PUSHPA RAMAN; CHERRY ANN WY; ARUM KUMAR; HARRY WANDER; AND MAX LINS, DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

Currently before the court are defendants FremontRideout Health Group, Leonard Marks, Pushpa Raman, Cherry Ann Wy, Arum Kumar, Harry Wander, and Max Lins's motions for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. In reply to plaintiff Chukwuemeka Ndulue's opposition to the motions for summary judgment, defendants raised evidentiary objections to several of plaintiff's key pieces of evidence submitted in opposition to the motions, contending that much of plaintiff's proffered evidence is irrelevant, improperly authenticated, and hearsay. (Docket No. 209.)

Under the Local Rules of this court, the non-moving party must file its opposition to the motion fourteen days before, and the moving party must file its reply seven days before, the date of the hearing on the motion. See E.D. Cal. Local R. 230, 260. The injection of numerous evidentiary objections less than one week before the hearing can hardly lead to a meaningful hearing on the merits of the motion, and the parties would be well served to give attention to the court's prior rulings. See, e.g., Burch v. Regents of Univ. of Ca., 433 F. Supp. 2d 1110, 1118-22 (E.D. Cal. 2006).

In the interests of efficiency and justice, the court will provide plaintiff with time to amend or resubmit his briefs and supporting evidence to cure, if possible, defendants' evidentiary objections, so that the evidence complies with the Federal Rules of Evidence. Defendants may then file new objections to the evidence. This will ensure that all admissible evidence is before the court prior to ruling on defendants' motions for summary judgment and limit the number of objections this court must rule on to those that cannot be resolved by amendment.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1) Plaintiff shall resubmit any amended opposition or evidence in support thereof no later than fourteen days from the date of this Order;

2) Defendants shall file any objections to plaintiff's resubmission of evidence and resubmit any amended reply in support of their motions for summary judgment no later than twenty-one days from the date of this Order;

3) Any evidentiary objections must be in the form of a separately numbered paragraph per objection, specifically identifying the statement objected to in the evidence and its location, citing the applicable Federal Rule of Evidence, and articulating the objection made therein;

4) The hearing on defendants' motions for summary judgment is continued to June 7, 2010, at 2:00 p.m.;

5) The Pretrial Conference set for June 1, 2010 is hereby vacated and reset for July 12, 2010, at 2:00 p.m.; and

6) The trial date of June 22, 2010 is hereby vacated and reset for September 14, 2010, at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100505

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.