Opinion
No. 00 C 1242
May 24, 2002
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, John D. Stauffer, Jr., filed a motion for partial summary judgment, with supporting documentation. The problem is that the supporting documentation does not fit neatly into the local requirements, although considerable material is provided, and defendants are, understandably, somewhat at a loss as to how to proceed. For example, plaintiff has filed a Local Rule 56 affidavit that largely sets forth how plaintiff will authenticate 23 documents, but the "how" is partly based on personal knowledge (Dr. Stauffer's affidavit), partly on purported admissions and partly on hearsay.
As best we can determine, the documents fall into three classifications: documents of which Dr. Stauffer has personal knowledge, as stated in her affidavit, and upon which she relies; documents from defendants that turned up during discovery and upon which she relies; and documents from defendants during discovery which she does not believe should or do apply to her relationship with defendants. Perhaps the best way to proceed is to have the documents of which she does not have personal knowledge authenticated by a request to admit, and an affidavit from Dr. Stauffer (or a designation to her deposition) can separate those upon which she relies from those she disclaims.
We think straightening out the documents is particularly necessary because plaintiff's L.R 56.1(a)(3) Statement of Material Facts is not a statement of facts but, rather, an argument which relies heavily upon the documents. But not all that argument relies upon the documents. To the extent that argument relies upon facts not found in the documents, those facts must be set forth in a statement of undisputed facts that references where in the record that fact is established, whether by affidavit or by deposition testimony. It is not enough to say "It is uncontroverted . . .,"
We question, however, whether it makes sense for plaintiff to engage in the entire effort prior to the June 19, 2002, pretrial conference. We suggest that plaintiff straighten out the documents before that date, if possible, so the parties are dealing with the same documents record, and we can then determine how best to proceed further, if necessary.