Free Memorandum in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:01-cv-01913-DJS

Document 51

Filed 08/09/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT HOWARD JOHN GOMBERT, JR. : : Plaintiff, : V. : : LARRY LYNCH & WILLIAM KAMINSKI : : Defendants. : PRISONER CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:01CV1913(DJS)(TPS)

AUGUST 3, 2004

DEFENDANTS' OBJECTION TO THE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants Larry Lynch and William Kaminski (collectively "the defendants") respectfully object to the plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, dated June 29, 2004. As is more fully set forth below, the plaintiff has failed to submit any evidence and has failed to cite any law supporting his argument. Rather, the plaintiff has submitted a brief list of unsupported allegations consisting largely of conclusory statements of law and in no way sufficient to support a judgment in his favor. The plaintiff's motion is inadequate to support summary judgment for several reasons: First, the plaintiff failed to carry his burden of establishing that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the undisputed facts warrant judgment in his favor. Cf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23; Adickles v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970). Second, the plaintiff failed to submit a concise statement of undisputed facts accompanied by specific citations to the affidavits of competent parties or other admissible evidence. Cf. L.Civ.R. 56(1), (3)(" ... pro se parties are hereby notified that failure to provide specific citations to evidence in the record as required by this Local Rule may result in sanctions, including, when the movant fails

369940

Case 3:01-cv-01913-DJS

Document 51

Filed 08/09/2004

Page 2 of 3

to comply, an order denying the motion for summary judgment ... "). Third, the plaintiff failed to submit a written memorandum of law with his motion. Cf. L.Civ.R. 7(a)(1)("Failure to submit a memorandum may be deemed sufficient cause to deny the motion."). The plaintiff's motion is inadequate as to form and substance and therefore it should be denied. Respectfully submitted, Defendants Larry Lynch and William Kaminski

By: ____________________________________ JAMES N. TALLBERG, ESQ. (ct17849) Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. One State Street P. O. Box 231277 Hartford, CT 06123-1277 (860) 548-2600

369940

2

Case 3:01-cv-01913-DJS

Document 51

Filed 08/09/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed, postage prepaid, this ___ day of August 2004, to the following pro se plaintiff: Howard J. Gombert, Jr. #108050 1153 East Street South Suffield, Ct. 06080 By:______________________________________ JAMES N. TALLBERG, ESQ. Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C.

369940

3