Free Order on Motion to Dismiss - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

I
F i
E
i
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT i
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ‘ ”` T‘`C “°“
ZBH5 AUG IB A b= 35
JAMES MCKINNON, ;
. . ‘ i?€$S`]`R!C]" COURT
PlS1¤¤ff» 3 III .:m¤Dr2D.c1.
V. : CASE NO. 3:O3CV944(RNC)(DFM)
YVONNE, ET AL., Q
Defendants. S l
l
RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS I
Plaintiff has several motions pending before the Court. Absent g
I
objection, his motion to amend the complaint [Doc. # 51] is granted. i
l
Defendants' motion to dismiss the original complaint [Doc. # 43] is i
therefore denied without prejudice to renewal. ` Q
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment [Doc. # 53] does not g
meet the requirements of Rule 56, D. Conn. L. Civ. R. Local Rule \
56(a)(l) states: "There shall be annexed to a motion for summary 1
judgment a document entitled ‘Local Rule 56(a)l Statement' which sets N
forth in Separately numbered paragraphs a concise statement of each X
material fact as to which the moving party contends there is no E
genuine issue to be tried." Local Rule 56(a)3 states: I
Each statement of material fact in a Local Rule 56(a)
Statement by a movant or opponent must be followed by a
citation to (l) the affidavit of a witness competent to
testify as to the facts at trial and/or (2) evidence that
would be admissible at trial. The affidavits, deposition
testimony, responses to discovery requests or other
documents containing such evidence shall be filed and
served with the Local Rule 56(a) Statement in conformity
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e).
D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 56(a)3. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for


._i_. ...` firiilii“......rJ..l.ww“-...u..ri....l..iim-_......rrm...l..iii..._mi_.__..ri__t_i
Case 3:03-cv—00944—RNC Document61 Filed 08/18/2005 Page20f2
summary judgment is denied without prejudice. If plaintiff wishes 5
n to refile this motion, he must comply with the local rule.
Plaintiff seeks to subpoena an unnamed correctional officer
[Doc. # 57]. This motion is denied as premature. Plaintiff also
seeks to "Dismiss Defendants Attorney General Kathleen Keating
Federal Rule 9. Pleading Special Matters (a) Capacity (sic)."
[Doc. # 59]. This motion is denied as lacking any discernable
merit. To the extent the motion addresses the motion to dismiss {
[Doc. # 43] filed by Attorney Keating, it is denied as moot in
light of the Court’s denial of that motion.
ly; Conclusion
Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to amend [Doc. # 51] is
granted. His motion for summary judgment [Doc. # 53] is denied
without prejudice to renewal. His motion to produce a witness
[Doc. # 5]] and his motion concerning Attorney Keating [Doc. # 59]
are denied. Defendants' motion to dismiss [Doc. # 43] is denied
without prejudice to renewal.
So ordered.
Dated at Hartford, Connecticut this il day o 2005. L
l
[
United States District Judge
2 l

I