ESTATE OF GERALDINE F. JENNINGS
v.
GULFSHORE PRIVATE HOME CARE, LLC
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a party may not file successive summary judgment motions without authorization and must comply with procedural rules regarding factual support.
Defendant Gulfshore Private Home Care, LLC filed a third motion for summary judgment, which was procedurally deficient. The motion was filed after the…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Local Rule 3.01(A) cases and more on FLexlaw
Third Party Defendant. /
OPINION AND ORDER1
Before the Court is Defendant Gulfshore Private Home Care, LLC,s Motion for Final Summary Judgment (Doc. 100). This is Gulfshore’s third summary judgment motion. The Court denied its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 69) without prejudice because it did not comply with the Court’s requirement that all summary judgment motions contain a statement of material facts. (Doc. 84). Gulfshore corrected the deficiency and filed its Dispositive Motion for Final Summary Judgment (Doc. 88), which the Court considered and denied on the merits. (Doc. 95). On July 22, 2020—the deadline for dispositive motions—Gulfshore took another swing at summary judgment in defiance of Local Rule 3.01(a) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c)(1)(A).
“Statement of Material Facts” in a single document not to exceed 25 pages in length.” (emphasis added)). Courts interpret this rule to permit a single summary judgment motion. See, e.g., Voter Verified, Inc. v. Premier Election Sols., Inc., No. 6:09-cv-1968- ORL-19KRS, 2010 WL 1049793, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 22, 2010). “[N]o federal litigant has an absolute right to bring multiple, piecemeal motions for summary judgment; rather, a successive Rule 56 motion may be filed only with the district court’s authorization.” Essex Ins. Co. v. Foley, 827 F. Supp. 2d 1326, 1329 n.2 (S.D. Ala. 2011) (collecting cases that disapprove of multiple summary judgment motions). Local Rule 3.01(a) is not the only rule Gulfshore ignored. Parties must support
factual assertions made in summary judgment motions by “citing to particular parts of materials in the record[.]” FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c)(1)(A) (emphasis added). Gulfshore’s Motion relies heavily on the Affidavit of Brandon Ernst. Not only was the affidavit absent from the record when Gulfshore filed its Motion, it apparently did not exist. Ernst signed the affidavit on July 28, 2020, and Gulfshore filed it the next day—one week after filing the Motion. (Doc. 108-1). Since Gulfshore filed its Motion and supporting materials in derogation of local and federal procedural rules, the Court denies the Motion. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: Defendant Gulfshore Private Home Care, LLC’s Motion for Final Summary Judgment (Doc. 100) is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 21st day of August, 2020.
, latray
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record