The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:20-CV-00394-FDW-DSC
AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE )
INSURANCE COMPANY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) ORDER and
) NOTICE OF HEARING
BROWN et al., )
)
Defendants. )
)
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Interpleader Defendant Charles J. Brown’s (“Brown”)
Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 23) filed on September 30, 2021, and Interpleader
Defendants Brittany Brown, Kasey Brown, and Carolina Funeral Service & Cremation Center, LLC’s
(“Carolina Funeral”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 24) filed on October 1, 2021. The
Court entered a Roseboro Order, notifying Brown of his right to respond to Carolina Funeral’s Motion
for Summary Judgment on October 28, 2021, wherein Brown was given until November 17, 2021 to
respond to Carolina Funeral’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 26). The deadline for both
Brown and Carolina Funeral to respond to the other’s Motion for Summary Judgment has long since
passed, and having received responses from neither party, the Motions are now ripe for review.
Summary judgment shall be granted only “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.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 56(a). The movant has the “initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis
for its motion, and identifying those portions of the pleadings, depositions, answers to
interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, which it believes
demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S.
317, 323 (1986) (internal citations omitted). A factual dispute is genuine “if the evidence is such
that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A fact is material only if it might affect the outcome of the suit
under governing law. Id. When ruling on a summary judgment motion, a court must view the
evidence and any inferences from the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.
Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255. Moreover, pleadings of pro se litigants are held to less stringent
standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Walker v. Walkie, 2019 WL 3338246, at
*4 (W.D.N.C. Jul. 25, 2019) (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972)). However, courts
cannot act as the pro se litigant’s advocate. Id. (citing Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1152 (4th
Cir. 1978)).
Here, both parties have failed to meet the initial burden of showing there is no genuine dispute
as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.1 Accordingly, IT IS
ORDERED that Defendant Charles J. Brown’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 23) is
DENIED, and Defendant Carolina Funeral’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 24) is
DENIED.
The parties shall TAKE NOTICE that this case will be tried before the undersigned
during the mixed trial term scheduled for January 3-21, 2022. As set forth in this Court’s
October 14, 2021 Order (Doc. No. 25), the parties shall appear at docket call on Monday,
January 3, 2022, at 9:00 A.M. in Courtroom #5B of the Charles R. Jonas Building. A final
pretrial conference will be held immediately following docket call.
1 Significantly, the Court notes its concern that Carolina Funeral’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 24), filed
by its attorney, consists solely of the following sentence: “COMES NOW Defendants, Carolina Funeral Service &
Cremation Center, LLC, Kasey Brown, and Brittany Brown [sic] and submits the following Affidavits in support of
its Motion to have the court pay the interplead funds from insurance policy to Carolina Funeral Service & Cremation
Center” (Doc. No. 24), along with the referenced affidavits. As such, Carolina Funeral’s Motion is completely devoid
of any legal analysis or substantive support to show it is entitled to the request it seeks from this Court.
The Clerk is respectfully DIRECTED to send a copy of this Notice and Order to Defendant
Charles J. Brown’s address of record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: December 14, 2021
Frank D. Whitney é ‘es
United States District Judge tg i