Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Murry v. Shelton

November 2, 2006

ERIC LAVELL MURRY ADC #96072 PLAINTIFF
v.
BRIAN SHELTON, SERGEANT, WEST MEMPHIS POLICE DEPARTMENT DEFENDANT



ORDER

Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at the Cummins Unit the Arkansas Department of Correction, has filed a pro se § 1983 action alleging that Defendant Sergeant Brian Shelton violated his Fourth Amendment rights by falsely arresting him on state charges and committed the state law tort of false imprisonment by holding him, for an unspecified period, on those false charges. See docket entry #2. On November 1, 2006, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, a Brief in Support, and a Statement of Indisputable Material Facts. See docket entries #25, #26, and, #27. The Court concludes that a Response from Plaintiff would be helpful to the resolution of that Motion.

At the summary judgment stage, a plaintiff cannot rest upon mere allegations and, instead, must meet proof with proof. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). This means that Plaintiff's Response must include affidavits,*fn1 prison records, or other evidence establishing that there is a genuine issue of material fact that must be resolved at a hearing or trial. Furthermore, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1, Plaintiff must also separately file a Statement of Disputed Facts, which lists: (a) any disagreement he has with the specifically numbered factual assertions contained in Defendant's Statement of Indisputable Material Facts (docket entry #13 ); and (b) any other disputed facts that he believes must be resolved at a hearing or trial.*fn2 Finally, Plaintiff is advised that if he intends to rely upon grievances or records that have been previously filed with the Court, he must specifically refer to those documents by docket number, page, date, and heading. The Court will not sift through the file to find support for Plaintiff's factual contentions. See Crossley v. Georgia-Pacific, Corp., 335 F.3d 1112, 1113-14 (8th Cir. 2004) (affirming the grant of summary judgment because a plaintiff failed to properly refer to specific pages of the record that supported his position).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

1. Plaintiff shall file, within thirty days of the entry of the Order, a Response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. That Response must comply with the Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, Local Rule 56.1, and the instructions set forth in this Order.

2. Plaintiff is advised that the failure to timely and properly comply with this Order could result in: (a) the dismissal of this action, without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2);*fn3 or (b) all of the facts set forth in Defendant's summary judgment ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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