Opinion

Sanks v. Board of Trustees, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 553

Court
District Court, S.D. Illinois
Filed
Apr 21, 2020
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 21.2%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

JOHN R. SANKS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

BOARD OF TRUSTEES, PLUMBERS )

AND PIPEFITTERS LOCAL 553 ) Case No. 3:19-CV-0381-GCS

PENSION PLAN, )

)

Defendant. )

)

ORDER

SISON, Magistrate Judge:

On April 21, 2020, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment (Doc. 45, 46).

However, the motion and the brief did not include the required Rule 56 notice. As a pro

se litigant, Sanks is entitled to notice of the consequences for failing to respond to a motion

for summary judgment. See Timms v. Frank, 953 F.2d 281, 285 (7th Cir. 1992); Lewis v.

Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100, 102 (7th Cir. 1982). To that end, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56

provides, in pertinent part the following:

(a) Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment. A party may

move for summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense – or part of each

claim or defense – on which the summary judgment is sought. The court shall

grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as

to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The

court should state on the record the reasons for granting or denying the motion.

***

Page 1 of 3

(c) Procedures.

(1) Supporting Factual Positions. A party asserting that a fact cannot

be or is genuinely disputed must support the assertion by:

(A) citing to particular parts of materials in the record, including

depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits or

declarations, stipulations (including those made for purposes of the motion

only), admissions, interrogatory answers, or other materials; or

(B) showing that the materials cited do not establish the absence or presence

of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse party cannot produce admissible

evidence to support the fact.

(2) Objection That a Fact Is Not Supported by Admissible Evidence. A party may

object that the material cited to support or dispute a fact cannot be presented in a

form that would be admissible in evidence.

(3) Materials Not Cited. The court need only consider the cited materials, but it

may consider other materials in the record.

(4) Affidavits or Declarations. An affidavit or declaration used to support or

oppose a motion must be made on personal knowledge, set out facts that would

be admissible in evidence, and show that the affiant or declarant is competent to

testify on the matters stated.

***

(e) Failing to Properly Support or Address a Fact. If a party fails to properly

support an assertion of fact or fails to properly address another party’s assertion

of fact as required by Rule 56(c), the court may:

(1) give an opportunity to properly support or address the fact;

(2) consider the fact undisputed for purposes of the motion;

(3) grant summary judgment if the motion and supporting materials – including

the facts considered undisputed – show that the movant is entitled to it; or

(4) issue any other appropriate order.

Page 2 of 3

This rule provides that any factual assertion or statement made in the movant’s

affidavits and/or other documentary evidence may be taken as true by the Court unless

the non-movant (Sanks) contradicts the movant with counter-affidavits and/or other

documentary evidence. Sanks may not rely on the allegations in the pleadings to support

his claim; rather he must show by affidavit or other documentary evidence that there is a

genuine dispute as to a material fact. If Sanks does not respond to the motion for

summary judgment with affidavits or other documentary evidence, the Court may grant

judgment in favor of Defendant and this matter may be terminated. Further, the failure

to file a response within the deadline “may, in the Court's discretion, be considered an

admission of the merits of the motion.” SDIL-LR 7.1(c)(1).

Dated: April 21, 2020. by Judge Sison

Aldine 2, 55. Date:

2020.04.21

15:05:36 -05'00'

GILBERT C. SISON

United States Magistrate Judge

Page 3 of 3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.