From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Valentine v. Richardson

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division
Aug 18, 2006
Civil Action No.: 4:05-00485-HMH-TER (D.S.C. Aug. 18, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No.: 4:05-00485-HMH-TER.

August 18, 2006


OPINION ORDER


The defendants, Officer D. Richardson, Lieutenant Pressly, Officer R. Goins, Officer Bennet, Officer Labonte, Officer Creasy, Officer D. Gardo, Officer Williams, Officer Youngblood, Officer Jonathan Tally, Sergeant Nation, Officer B. Jones, Officers John Doe's, Officer Kristy McCraw, and Greenville County (collectively "Moving Defendants") filed a motion for summary judgment on October 14, 2005.

The Moving Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under Rule 56, the moving party bears the burden of showing that summary judgment is proper. Rule 56(c) provides, "the judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, deposition, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Rule 56(e) provides that "supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein. Sworn or certified copies of all papers or parts thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be attached thereto or served therewith." Local Civil Rule 7.04 of the District of South Carolina requires that, where appropriate, "motions shall be accompanied by affidavits or other supporting documents." The Moving Defendants submit medical records, incident reports, and policies. However, no affidavit of a record custodian or any other witness or other evidence is offered to support the Moving Defendants' claim that no genuine issues of material fact exist. The court finds that the Moving Defendants have failed to meet their burden under Rule 56.

It is therefore

ORDERED that Moving Defendants' motion for summary judgment, docket number 56, is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Valentine v. Richardson

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division
Aug 18, 2006
Civil Action No.: 4:05-00485-HMH-TER (D.S.C. Aug. 18, 2006)
Case details for

Valentine v. Richardson

Case Details

Full title:Randy L. Valentine, Plaintiff, v. Ofc. D. Richardson, Lt. Pressley, Ofc…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division

Date published: Aug 18, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No.: 4:05-00485-HMH-TER (D.S.C. Aug. 18, 2006)