Peak v. Taylor

• Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
• Decided: March 10, 2025
• Docket: 8:23-cv-00345
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

TERRIJANA PEAK,

Plaintiff, 8:23-CV-345

vs. ORDER

JARED TAYLOR, Detective #2146,

Defendant.

The plaintiff has filed a motion for summary judgment (filing 27). That motion will be denied without prejudice. As a general rule, summary judgment is proper only after the nonmovant has had adequate time for discovery. Hamilton v. Bangs, McCullen, Butler, Foye & Simmons, L.L.P., 687 F.3d 1045, 1049-50 (8th Cir. 2012). Discovery in this case is not yet complete. See filing 22; filing 23; filing 25. In addition, the plaintiff's motion is unsupported by the brief and separate statement of material facts required by this Court's local rules. See NECivR 7.1(a)(1) and NECivR 56.1(a). Pursuant to those rules, the Court may "treat the failure to file a brief as an abandonment of the motion" and "[f]ailure to submit a statement of material facts may be grounds to deny the motion." NECivR 7.1(a)(1)(B); NECivR 56.1(a)(1). Accordingly, the Court will deny the plaintiff's motion as both unsupported and premature. Such denial shall be without prejudice to reasserting the motion later, after discovery and case progression, and properly supported as required by this Court's rules. The plaintiff has also filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (filing 26). It is not clear why, because she has already been given leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See filing 5. Accordingly, her new request for the same thing is moot.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (filing 26) is denied as moot.

2. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (filing 27) is denied without prejudice.

Dated this 10th day of March, 2025.

BY THE COURT:

hn M. Gerrard enior United States District Judge

-2-