Opinion
Case No. 2:00-CV-872TC.
May 7, 2003
ORDER
This matter is before the court on Defendant Heath Markovetz's motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the May 8, 2003 hearing Mr. Markovetz's motion for summary judgment is STRICKEN, and Mr. Butt is permitted to submit additional, admissible evidence.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(e) requires a nonmovant "that would bear the burden of persuasion at trial" to "go beyond the pleadings and `set forth specific facts' that would be admissible in evidence in the event of trial from which a rational trier of fact could find for the nonmovant." Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 144 F.3d 664, 671 (10th Cir. 1998) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)). The specific and pertinent facts put forth by the nonmovant "must be identified by reference to an affidavit, a deposition transcript or a specific exhibit incorporated therein." Thomas v. Wichita Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 968 F.2d 1022, 1024 (10th Cir. 1992). Mere allegations and references to the pleadings will not suffice. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).
As Plaintiff Douglas Butt emphasizes, courts must liberally construe a pro se party's pleadings. See White v. State of Colorado, 82 F.3d 364, 366 (10th Cir. 1996). The liberal construction courts must give to a pro se plaintiff's complaint, however, does "not relieve plaintiff of his burden of presenting sufficient facts to state a legally cognizable claim." Id.
Mr. Butt has not submitted evidence that complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Mr. Butt, if he desires, has three weeks from the date of this Order to submit admissible evidence supporting his arguments.
The court will contact Mr. Butt and I. Wesley Robinson, counsel for Mr. Markovetz, with a new hearing date.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT: