Opinion
NO. 4:01-CV-0223-A
July 30, 2001
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
Came on for consideration the motion of defendant, Federal Express Corporation, for final summary judgment. Plaintiff, Prince Tamunoene, has failed to respond to the motion, which is ripe for ruling. The court, having considered the motion, the record, the summary judgment evidence, and applicable authorities, finds that the motion should be granted.
The court notes that defendant's motion was filed June 22, 2001. Pursuant to Rule 7.1(e) of the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, plaintiff's response was to be filed within twenty days from the date the motion was filed. On July 2, 2001, plaintiff filed motions to withhold summary judgment until after the pretrial conference and for early conference due to forgery by the defendant. On July 24, 2001, the court heard plaintiff's motions and ordered that they be denied. Even were the court to consider plaintiff's motions as a response to defendant's motion for final summary judgment, it would be to no avail. Even if, as plaintiff alleges, his signatures on a December 29, 1999, interoffice memorandum and a September 13, 2000, interoffice memorandum are forged, he has not raised a genuine fact issue for trial. Those documents are not relevant to the motion for summary judgment, nor is the motion dependent upon them.
The court further notes that by signing the joint pretrial order presented to the court July 30, 2001, plaintiff has agreed to a list of facts established by the pleadings, by stipulation, or by admission that effectively vitiates all of his claims. See July 30, 2001, joint pretrial order.
A party is entitled to summary judgment on all or any part of a claim as to which there is no genuine issue of material fact and as to which the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. FED. R. Civ. P. 56(c); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247 (1986). The moving party has the initial burden of showing that there is no genuine issue of material fact. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 256. The movant may discharge this burden by pointing out the absence of evidence to support one or more essential elements of the non-moving party's claim "since a complete failure of proof concerning an essential element of the nonmoving party's case necessarily renders all other facts immaterial."Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323-25 (1986). Once the moving party has carried its burden under Rule 56(c), the non-moving party must do more than merely show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986). The party opposing the motion may not rest on mere allegations or denials of pleading, but must set forth specific facts showing a genuine issue for trial. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248, 256. To meet this burden, the nonmovant must "identify specific evidence in the record and articulate the `precise manner' in which that evidence support[s] [its] claim[s]."Forsyth v. Barr, 19 F.3d 1527, 1537 (5th Cir. 1994). An issue is material only if its resolution could affect the outcome of the action. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248. Unsupported allegations, conclusory in nature, are insufficient to defeat a proper motion for summary judgment. Simmons v. Lyons, 746 F.2d 265, 269 (5th Cir. 1984).
The standard for granting a summary judgment is the same as the standard for a directed verdict. Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 323. If the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the non-moving party, there is no genuine issue for trial.Matsushita, 475 U.S. at 597.
In this case, defendant has discharged its summary judgment burden by pointing out the absence of evidence to support one or more essential elements of plaintiff's claims. Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 323-25. Plaintiff has failed to come forward with any evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact. Therefore,
The court ORDERS that defendant's motion for final summary judgment be, and is hereby, granted; that plaintiff take nothing on his claims against defendant; and that such claims be, and are hereby, dismissed with prejudice.