From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arnet v. Brantley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Mar 28, 2014
Civil Action No. 12-11327-LTS (D. Mass. Mar. 28, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-11327-LTS

03-28-2014

LILIANE ARNET, Plaintiff, v. DAVID BRANTLEY, Defendant.


ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

SOROKIN, C.M.J.

Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. No. 8, is DENIED. The papers reveal genuine disputes of material fact at least as to (a) whether Defendant breached the duty of care and (b) whether Plaintiff is liable in whole or part for her injuries due to her own negligence. Even if Defendant's email, Doc. No. 9-5, is a binding, authenticated, admissible statement—a point Plaintiff may press at trial—it does not suffice for summary judgment in light of other evidence that the jury is entitled to hear regarding liability and the issue of comparative negligence. In light of the Court's ruling on Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant's Motion to Strike, Doc. No. 14, is DENIED AS MOOT.

The parties shall file a joint status report within fourteen days advising as to whether the parties are ready for trial and, if not, what discovery remains and a proposed schedule to complete that discovery. The parties shall also report whether they wish to mediate prior to trial.

SO ORDERED.

__________

Leo T. Sorokin

Chief United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Arnet v. Brantley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Mar 28, 2014
Civil Action No. 12-11327-LTS (D. Mass. Mar. 28, 2014)
Case details for

Arnet v. Brantley

Case Details

Full title:LILIANE ARNET, Plaintiff, v. DAVID BRANTLEY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Date published: Mar 28, 2014

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-11327-LTS (D. Mass. Mar. 28, 2014)