Opinion
Civil No. 02-1123 (JP).
July 29, 2004
ORDER
The Court has before it "Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply to Defendants' Reply" ( docket No. 89). In such motion, Plaintiffs request that the Court strike Defendants' allegation presented in the "Reply to Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiffs' Statement of Uncontested Facts" (docket No. 79), to the effect that Plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie case of political discrimination under the First Amendment.
In their "Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition," filed with the Court on August 3, 2003, Defendants stated that "plaintiffs ha[d] failed to establish a prima facie case of political discrimination under the First Amendment." In their sur-reply, Plaintiffs reacted to this allegation in the following way:
"E. Defendants' new claim that Plaintiffs have failed to Establish a Prima Facie Case of Political Discrimination Should be Stricken
In their Reply . . . the defendants request summary judgment alleging that the Plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie case of political discrimination under the First Amendment. Plaintiffs request that said argument be stricken because it was not originally stated in their Motion for Summary Judgment. As a matter of fact, the words prima facie or the leading case Mt. Healthy do not appear at all in Defendants forty (40) page Motion for Summary Judgment which Plaintiffs opposed. The only arguments presented by Defendants were those related to (1) due process; (2) qualified immunity and (3) punitive damages against the Municipality."
The Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs' request to strike Defendants' allegation and STATES that Defendants have in fact submitted a motion for summary judgment alleging that Plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie case of political discrimination under the First Amendment. Furthermore, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs until the end of business of Friday, August 13, 2004, to submit an opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment that alleges that Plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie case of political discrimination under the First Amendment. If Plaintiffs would like to further oppose said motion for summary judgment allegation, they should do it by the August 13, 2004, date. These issues have been previously discussed and considered by the parties so no additional time will be granted for Plaintiffs' opposition.