Opinion
6:22-cv-1417-CEM-LHP
10-25-2022
SHIRLEY BAKER ANDERSON, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH MUNICIPAL, RAYAN BELL, SUNTRUST MORTGAGE OF VIRGINIA, GARY M. GLASSMAN, ROBERT SCOTT KAHANE & ASSOCIATES, THOMAS CROWDER, CINDY WOLPER BORIZILLO, RORICK F. WILLIS, II, JOSEE RODRIGUIZ LUIS, III and MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, Defendants.
ORDER
LESLIE HOFFMAN PRICE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MOTION: MEMORANDUMS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT UNOPPOSED FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL. PROCEDURE 56 AND, UNLESS THE COURT ORDERS OTHERWISE, THIS RULE. UNOPPOSED MOTION FEDERAL COURTS HAVE JURISDICTION OVER VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS 28 U.S.C. AND SEC. 1331 (Doc. No. 26)
FILED: October 12, 2022
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED without prejudice.
MOTION: PLAINTIFF OPPOSED AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO THE COURSE TO SHOW CAUSE. FED. R. CIVIL PROCEDURE BY PLACING SUPPLEMENTATION LANGUAGE IN A DISCOVERY REQUEST. F RULES 26(E), THE COURT ISSUED AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE BECAUSE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE OPPOSING PARTY IS UNAVAILABLE TO CONFER BEFORE FILING. RULE 3.01(G)(3) (Doc. No. 27)
FILED: October 12, 2022
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED without prejudice.
MOTION: MEMORANDUM PLAINTIFF FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITHIN CAUSE OF ACTION: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 FED. QUESTION FOURTEEN DAYS AFTER SERVICE OF THE RESPONSE. A PARTY MAY REPLY TO A RESPONSE NON COMPLIANCE (Doc. No. 28)
FILED: October 12, 2022
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED without prejudice.
This cause comes before the Court on the above-styled motions, filed by Plaintiff Shirley Baker Anderson, who appears pro se. Doc. Nos. 26-28. It is not clear from any of the motions what relief Plaintiff seeks. For one, Plaintiff appears to at least partly respond to allegations from Defendant the City of Daytona Beach's motions to dismiss. By the title of the motions, Plaintiff also appears to request summary judgment. The remainder of Plaintiff's motions reference, among other things, prior Court Orders, Local Rules, Florida Statutes, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and alleged conduct by Defendants. See id.
Upon consideration, each of the motions (Doc. Nos. 26-28) will be denied without prejudice for failure to comply with the Local Rules of this Court, including Local Rules 1.08, 3.01(a), and 3.01(g). Any renewed motions must comply with all Local Rules, include a memorandum of legal authority in support, and state Defendants' position on the request.
The Court notes that to the extent that Plaintiff's motions are an attempt to respond to motions to dismiss, Plaintiff may file a response to any pending motions to dismiss, as appropriate, in accordance with Local Rule 3.01(c). However, insofar as Plaintiff seeks summary judgment, that request is premature, as discovery has yet to commence. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(d)(1). See also Smith v. Fla. Dep't of Corr., 713 F.3d 1059, 1064 (11th Cir. 2013) (“Summary judgment is premature when a party is not provided a reasonable opportunity to discover information essential to his opposition.”).
DONE and ORDERED.