United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division
August 26, 2014
WILLIAM DAVIDSON HAMBY, JR., Plaintiff,
BETH GENTRY; DARON HALL, Defendants.
THE HONORABLE KEVIN H. SHARP,
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
JOHN S. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Hamby, a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed his motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 49). Defendants have filed a response in opposition (Docket Entry No. 54).
For the reasons stated below, the undersigned Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be DENIED.
Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which governs motions for summary judgment, provides that the Court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material facts and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Local Rule 56.01 requires that any motion for summary judgment filed in this district shall be accompanied by a separate concise statement of facts as to which the moving party contends there is no genuine issue for trial. The rule requires that each such fact shall be set forth in a separate, numbered paragraph and shall be supported by a specific citation to the record. In addition, Local Rule 7.01 requires that every motion that may require the resolution of an issue of law be accompanied by a supporting memorandum of law.
Plaintiff Hamby has failed to file with his motion the required concise statement of undisputed facts and the supporting memorandum of law. In addition, his motion fails to demonstrate that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact, or that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
For all of the foregoing reasons, the undersigned Magistrate Judge finds that Plaintiff Hamby's motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 49) should be DENIED.
For the reasons stated above, the undersigned Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff Hamby's motion for summary judgment be DENIED.
Under Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, any party has 14 days from receipt of this Report and Recommendation in which to file any written objections to this Recommendation with the District Court. Any party opposing said objections shall have 14 days from receipt of any objections filed in this Report in which to file any responses to said objections. Failure to file specific objections within 14 days of receipt of this Report and Recommendation can constitute a waiver of further appeal of this Recommendation. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985), Reh'g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986).