ORDER - Motion to Dismiss

J
4:08-cv-02753-TLW -TER             Date Filed 08/06/10        Entry Number 137           Page 1 of 3
                               IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
                                   FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
                                            FLORENCE DIVISION

Howard K. Stern,                                                 )
                                                                 )      Civil Action No. 4:08-cv-2753-TLW-TER
                           Plaintiff,                            )
vs.                                                              )
                                                                 )                 ORDER
Stancil Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, et al,                         )
                                                                 )
                           Defendants.                           )


A motion to dismiss or for summary judgment has been filed in this case. Because the defendant, G. Ben Thompson,
does not have an attorney, the Clerk is directed to send him by mail a copy of this Order, an explanation of summary
judgment procedure, and a copy of pertinent extracts from Rule 12 and Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.

The defendants shall have a period of thirty-four (34) days from the date of this Order to file any material they wish
to file in opposition to the motion in accordance with the requirements explained in the Rules, and if they fail to
respond adequately, the motion may be granted, thereby ending this case.1 Careful attention should be given to the
requirements of Rule 56(e) concerning the necessity for affidavits filed in opposition to summary judgment to be based
on personal knowledge, to contain facts admissible in evidence, and to be executed by a person who would be
competent to testify as to matters contained in the affidavit if he or she were called to the witness stand. Affidavits
or exhibits pertaining to matters that are not involved in this case will not be considered by the Court, nor will
affidavits that contain only conclusory statements or argument of facts or law.

A person who is representing himself in federal court may submit a brief or memorandum containing argument if he
or she desires to do so, but this is not required. However, submission of a brief, or even the filing of a reply to an
answer or return, will not be sufficient alone to withstand a properly supported motion for summary judgment.

This order is entered at the direction of the Court.

                                                                         s/Thomas E. Rogers, III
                                                                         Thomas E Rogers III
August 6, 2010                                                           United States Magistrate Judge




      1
    This is one (1) month plus four (4) days mail time, and the time will not be enlarged unless highly persuasive reasons are
submitted under oath to support a motion to enlarge time.
4:08-cv-02753-TLW -TER              Date Filed 08/06/10        Entry Number 137           Page 2 of 3
                          EXPLANATION OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT PROCEDURE
                              (For plaintiffs or petitioners who do not have counsel)2



        When a party moves or pleads for summary judgment under Rule 56, he is arguing, in effect, that a claim has
not been shown by the plaintiff's complaint (or the petitioner's petition). If affidavits or other material are submitted
by a defendant (or respondent) to support that defense, and if the court accepts such matters outside the pleading, the
court treats the submission as a request for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

         Whenever one or more affidavits or other material outside the pleading of a defendant (or respondent) are served
on a pro se plaintiff (or a pro se petitioner), he cannot rest upon the allegations or denials of his own pleadings. He has
a right to file one or more opposing affidavits or other exhibits, and indeed must do so if his action is to survive. If this
is not done, the court may very well grant summary judgment against him. [This is true also if the parties are all
represented by counsel.]

       All affidavits submitted by pro se litigants must meet the standards required by Rule 56, which standards can
be determined from the following quotation of a portion of Rule 56(e):

        "(e) 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."

         If a pro se litigant does not fully understand what facts would be admissible, and who would be competent to
testify, he should not withhold affidavits, for the court will determine whether these standards are met by his
affidavit(s).

          Under Rule 56(f), if a person served with affidavits cannot obtain opposing affidavits, he must submit to the
court his own affidavit, stating why he cannot present by affidavit facts essential to justify his opposition to the facts
set out in the affidavits served by the opposing party. Under Rule 56(g), all affidavits submitted to the court must be
made in good faith (and, obviously, the facts sworn to must be true),3 and appropriate action will be taken by the court
if it is satisfied that affidavits are presented in bad faith, or solely for the purpose of delay.


                                                              UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE




    2
     This explanation, or one of similar import, is required by Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), which was
a civil rights case. The same procedure applies in federal habeas corpus cases under Webb v. Garrison, No. 77-1855 (4th Cir.,
decided July 6, 1977).

    3
    All affidavits submitted in a federal case are submitted under penalties of perjury or subornation of perjury (18 U.S.C. §§
1621 and 1622), and the federal statute which makes use of the mail to defraud a crime (18 U.S.C. § 1341) has been applied to
convict a person who transmitted false averments by mail in a civil rights suit seeking damages. United States v. Murr, 681 F.2d
246 (4th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 973 (1982).
4:08-cv-02753-TLW -TER              Date Filed 08/06/10         Entry Number 137            Page 3 of 3
                                     EXCERPTS FROM RULE 12 AND RULE 56

                                              Federal Rules of Civil Procedure4


Rule 12(b) provides, in part:

       "* * * If, on a motion asserting the defense...to dismiss for failure of the pleading [this means the
       complaint, motion or petition] to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the
       pleading [here meaning the answer or return] are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion
       shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties
       shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent [that is, having some
       connection with the matter or matters in dispute] to such a motion by Rule 56."

Rule 56 provides, in part:

       "(b). . . A party against whom a claim...is asserted or a declaratory judgment is sought may, at any time,
       move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in his favor as to all or any part
       thereof."

       "(e) * * * When a motion for summary judgment [and this includes a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss] is
       made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party [this is the plaintiff(s) or petitioner(s)] may
       not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading [meaning the complaint, motion or the
       petition], but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts
       showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. [Emphasis added to show that specific facts are required,
       not conclusory allegations or argument.] If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate,
       shall be entered against him."

See attached explanation of summary judgment procedure for a quotation of a part of Rule 56(e) as to the form and
sufficiency of affidavits filed in support of or in opposition to a motion for summary judgment. Rule 56(e) also requires
that copies of all papers referred to in an affidavit must be attached to the affidavit, and that such copies must be sworn
to or certified.




   4
    The material contained within brackets is inserted by way of explanation of terms used, and is not a part of the Rules quoted.
These extracts are prepared for the use of state and federal prisoners who submit complaints, petitions or § 2255 motions to the
United States District Court in their own behalf (pro se). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has expressly
or impliedly approved the application of Rules 12 and 56 to petitions for post-conviction relief in federal court pursuant to Title
28, United States Code, Sections 2254 and 2255, as well as to civil rights actions based on Title 42, United States Code, Sections
1983 and 1985.

Más contenido relacionado

Was ist angesagt?(18)

CaveatCaveat
Caveat
Shakuntla Sangam13.6K views
Omnibus motion bribery-J JOHN SEBASTIAN ATTORNEYOmnibus motion bribery-J JOHN SEBASTIAN ATTORNEY
Omnibus motion bribery-J JOHN SEBASTIAN ATTORNEY
jjohnsebastianattorney1.6K views
Cpc learning module 7 appealsCpc learning module 7 appeals
Cpc learning module 7 appeals
Dr. Vikas Khakare2.6K views
Holloway memo-filed-7-28-14Holloway memo-filed-7-28-14
Holloway memo-filed-7-28-14
Justicebuilding11.9K views
Winning the Unwinnable DUI CaseWinning the Unwinnable DUI Case
Winning the Unwinnable DUI Case
Ben Sessions453 views
WimlwtieWimlwtie
Wimlwtie
awasalam332 views
FOIA darren chakerFOIA darren chaker
FOIA darren chaker
Darren Chaker238 views
Recording of EvidenceRecording of Evidence
Recording of Evidence
Legal7.5K views
Attachment of propertyAttachment of property
Attachment of property
ChetanSikarwar11.5K views
Res  judicataRes  judicata
Res judicata
pshreyap8.8K views
Jurisdiction of courts under cpc 1908Jurisdiction of courts under cpc 1908
Jurisdiction of courts under cpc 1908
Muhammad Ijaz Syed4.9K views

Destacado(20)

Business english 1  assignmentBusiness english 1  assignment
Business english 1 assignment
Daniel Perez726 views
Meg-whitmanMeg-whitman
Meg-whitman
Delhi School of Economics1.2K views
WA Westone SIDEWA Westone SIDE
WA Westone SIDE
aades.darwin353 views
Podcasting Pl Session 2Podcasting Pl Session 2
Podcasting Pl Session 2
blackcat305 views
Innovation leadership in educationInnovation leadership in education
Innovation leadership in education
Timothy Wooi3.1K views
Muhtar kentMuhtar kent
Muhtar kent
redgen01814 views
Muhtar kentMuhtar kent
Muhtar kent
Abhishek Arigela963 views
May 2014 TCN Fast Track Faculty and MentorsMay 2014 TCN Fast Track Faculty and Mentors
May 2014 TCN Fast Track Faculty and Mentors
The Capital Network1.7K views
modelo TMNmodelo TMN
modelo TMN
Ronald Lòpez18.3K views
2014 fortune 100 ceo pk sc2014 fortune 100 ceo pk sc
2014 fortune 100 ceo pk sc
Sheila Curran, SPHR2.6K views
Power Point SerpientesPower Point Serpientes
Power Point Serpientes
IPC6.7K views
Michael dell presentationMichael dell presentation
Michael dell presentation
Chin Yew Steven Lee12.5K views
Latihan litarLatihan litar
Latihan litar
Jiemin Chen955 views
New Latihan LitarNew Latihan Litar
New Latihan Litar
Adada Eric1.4K views

Similar a ORDER - Motion to Dismiss (20)

Último(20)

Narration lesson plan.docxNarration lesson plan.docx
Narration lesson plan.docx
Tariq KHAN84 views
A Day At 07.45 Using A CodeA Day At 07.45 Using A Code
A Day At 07.45 Using A Code
Ashley Lott55 views
META Quiz Finals.pptxMETA Quiz Finals.pptx
META Quiz Finals.pptx
AtmadipMohanta237 views
Chemistry of sex hormones.pptxChemistry of sex hormones.pptx
Chemistry of sex hormones.pptx
RAJ K. MAURYA93 views
ICANNICANN
ICANN
RajaulKarim2053 views
discussion post.pdfdiscussion post.pdf
discussion post.pdf
jessemercerail57 views
M. Pharm Unit 2. Regulatory Asspects.pptxM. Pharm Unit 2. Regulatory Asspects.pptx
M. Pharm Unit 2. Regulatory Asspects.pptx
Ashokrao Mane College of Pharmacy, Peth- Vadgaon86 views
ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY UNIT 1 { PART-1}ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY UNIT 1 { PART-1}
ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY UNIT 1 { PART-1}
DR .PALLAVI PATHANIA102 views
Azure DevOps Pipeline setup for Mule APIs #36Azure DevOps Pipeline setup for Mule APIs #36
Azure DevOps Pipeline setup for Mule APIs #36
MysoreMuleSoftMeetup66 views
Lecture: Open InnovationLecture: Open Innovation
Lecture: Open Innovation
Michal Hron68 views
Part of speech in English LanguagePart of speech in English Language
Part of speech in English Language
JamaicaMacarayoBorga56 views
2022 CAPE Merit List 2023 2022 CAPE Merit List 2023
2022 CAPE Merit List 2023
Caribbean Examinations Council2.3K views
How to present dataHow to present data
How to present data
Pavel Šabatka41 views
Narration  ppt.pptxNarration  ppt.pptx
Narration ppt.pptx
Tariq KHAN57 views
Streaming Quiz 2023.pdfStreaming Quiz 2023.pdf
Streaming Quiz 2023.pdf
Quiz Club NITW77 views
ICS3211_lecture_week72023.pdfICS3211_lecture_week72023.pdf
ICS3211_lecture_week72023.pdf
Vanessa Camilleri175 views
Plastic waste.pdfPlastic waste.pdf
Plastic waste.pdf
alqaseedae72 views
Class 10 English  lesson plansClass 10 English  lesson plans
Class 10 English lesson plans
Tariq KHAN149 views

ORDER - Motion to Dismiss

  • 1. 4:08-cv-02753-TLW -TER Date Filed 08/06/10 Entry Number 137 Page 1 of 3 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION Howard K. Stern, ) ) Civil Action No. 4:08-cv-2753-TLW-TER Plaintiff, ) vs. ) ) ORDER Stancil Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, et al, ) ) Defendants. ) A motion to dismiss or for summary judgment has been filed in this case. Because the defendant, G. Ben Thompson, does not have an attorney, the Clerk is directed to send him by mail a copy of this Order, an explanation of summary judgment procedure, and a copy of pertinent extracts from Rule 12 and Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendants shall have a period of thirty-four (34) days from the date of this Order to file any material they wish to file in opposition to the motion in accordance with the requirements explained in the Rules, and if they fail to respond adequately, the motion may be granted, thereby ending this case.1 Careful attention should be given to the requirements of Rule 56(e) concerning the necessity for affidavits filed in opposition to summary judgment to be based on personal knowledge, to contain facts admissible in evidence, and to be executed by a person who would be competent to testify as to matters contained in the affidavit if he or she were called to the witness stand. Affidavits or exhibits pertaining to matters that are not involved in this case will not be considered by the Court, nor will affidavits that contain only conclusory statements or argument of facts or law. A person who is representing himself in federal court may submit a brief or memorandum containing argument if he or she desires to do so, but this is not required. However, submission of a brief, or even the filing of a reply to an answer or return, will not be sufficient alone to withstand a properly supported motion for summary judgment. This order is entered at the direction of the Court. s/Thomas E. Rogers, III Thomas E Rogers III August 6, 2010 United States Magistrate Judge 1 This is one (1) month plus four (4) days mail time, and the time will not be enlarged unless highly persuasive reasons are submitted under oath to support a motion to enlarge time.
  • 2. 4:08-cv-02753-TLW -TER Date Filed 08/06/10 Entry Number 137 Page 2 of 3 EXPLANATION OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT PROCEDURE (For plaintiffs or petitioners who do not have counsel)2 When a party moves or pleads for summary judgment under Rule 56, he is arguing, in effect, that a claim has not been shown by the plaintiff's complaint (or the petitioner's petition). If affidavits or other material are submitted by a defendant (or respondent) to support that defense, and if the court accepts such matters outside the pleading, the court treats the submission as a request for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Whenever one or more affidavits or other material outside the pleading of a defendant (or respondent) are served on a pro se plaintiff (or a pro se petitioner), he cannot rest upon the allegations or denials of his own pleadings. He has a right to file one or more opposing affidavits or other exhibits, and indeed must do so if his action is to survive. If this is not done, the court may very well grant summary judgment against him. [This is true also if the parties are all represented by counsel.] All affidavits submitted by pro se litigants must meet the standards required by Rule 56, which standards can be determined from the following quotation of a portion of Rule 56(e): "(e) 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." If a pro se litigant does not fully understand what facts would be admissible, and who would be competent to testify, he should not withhold affidavits, for the court will determine whether these standards are met by his affidavit(s). Under Rule 56(f), if a person served with affidavits cannot obtain opposing affidavits, he must submit to the court his own affidavit, stating why he cannot present by affidavit facts essential to justify his opposition to the facts set out in the affidavits served by the opposing party. Under Rule 56(g), all affidavits submitted to the court must be made in good faith (and, obviously, the facts sworn to must be true),3 and appropriate action will be taken by the court if it is satisfied that affidavits are presented in bad faith, or solely for the purpose of delay. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 This explanation, or one of similar import, is required by Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), which was a civil rights case. The same procedure applies in federal habeas corpus cases under Webb v. Garrison, No. 77-1855 (4th Cir., decided July 6, 1977). 3 All affidavits submitted in a federal case are submitted under penalties of perjury or subornation of perjury (18 U.S.C. §§ 1621 and 1622), and the federal statute which makes use of the mail to defraud a crime (18 U.S.C. § 1341) has been applied to convict a person who transmitted false averments by mail in a civil rights suit seeking damages. United States v. Murr, 681 F.2d 246 (4th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 973 (1982).
  • 3. 4:08-cv-02753-TLW -TER Date Filed 08/06/10 Entry Number 137 Page 3 of 3 EXCERPTS FROM RULE 12 AND RULE 56 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure4 Rule 12(b) provides, in part: "* * * If, on a motion asserting the defense...to dismiss for failure of the pleading [this means the complaint, motion or petition] to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading [here meaning the answer or return] are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent [that is, having some connection with the matter or matters in dispute] to such a motion by Rule 56." Rule 56 provides, in part: "(b). . . A party against whom a claim...is asserted or a declaratory judgment is sought may, at any time, move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in his favor as to all or any part thereof." "(e) * * * When a motion for summary judgment [and this includes a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss] is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party [this is the plaintiff(s) or petitioner(s)] may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading [meaning the complaint, motion or the petition], but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. [Emphasis added to show that specific facts are required, not conclusory allegations or argument.] If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against him." See attached explanation of summary judgment procedure for a quotation of a part of Rule 56(e) as to the form and sufficiency of affidavits filed in support of or in opposition to a motion for summary judgment. Rule 56(e) also requires that copies of all papers referred to in an affidavit must be attached to the affidavit, and that such copies must be sworn to or certified. 4 The material contained within brackets is inserted by way of explanation of terms used, and is not a part of the Rules quoted. These extracts are prepared for the use of state and federal prisoners who submit complaints, petitions or § 2255 motions to the United States District Court in their own behalf (pro se). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has expressly or impliedly approved the application of Rules 12 and 56 to petitions for post-conviction relief in federal court pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2254 and 2255, as well as to civil rights actions based on Title 42, United States Code, Sections 1983 and 1985.