Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 7 of
7
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315 RegisterActionDate "2018-05-18" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 5/18/18. Plaintiff had previously filed a 109-page response to Defendants' motion for summary judgment in which he characterized inference and argument as "Undisputed Material Facts and "Additional Material Facts." The Court estimated that Plaintiff had submitted approximately 90 pages of argument, in violation of CDIL-LR 7.1(D)(5). It gave Plaintiff an opportunity to revise his response to conform to the local rules. For reasons unknown, Plaintiff now submits a 123 page response. He beings with a 5 page typed introduction which is actually argument. He offers 151 "Additional Material Facts" going back to a near-fatal accident in New Orleans in 1997. The Additional "Material Facts" include that Defendant 0525C7E intentionally omitted information from the medical record, that Defendant 0525C7E was hostile, that he refused to provide care, and that he "lied" and discredited Plaintiff. Plaintiff claims that 63AB356 preventing his receiving medical follow-up and that Defendant 327C921 told him he didn't deserve the air he breathed. Plaintiff also references decades of medical treatment and that he sent a letter to Governor Quinn. This argument and innuendo does not constitute fact and much of it is not material to the issues here. The section labeled Argument is 48 handwritten pages with the additional 5 page introduction. While Plaintiff claims that this is the equivalent of 15 typed pages, this appears doubtful. But, whether true or not, it is clear that Plaintiff has submitted dozens more pages of argument mislabeled as fact. Plaintiff's latest response 245 does not comply with the local rules and is, in fact, longer than the original which was dismissed. 245 is DISMISSED as well. Plaintiff will be given one final opportunity to file a response to Defendants' 206 . He is not to label accusations, argument, inference and innuendo as "Material Facts." Plaintiff's motion to delay ruling 242 is rendered MOOT. (TC, ilcd) (Entered: 05/18/2018)" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315 hasJudgeReference SJ001500 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de259 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de307 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de315 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01024_de310 @default.