Stuart Wright v. United States

This Eighth Circuit decision affirming the Magistrate’s order “reflected a clear misapprehension of summary judgment standards in light of [Supreme Court] precedents” --- like what happened in Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650, 659, 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1868 (2014) (per curiam). Ignoring Wright’s detailed facts violated procedural rules and Supreme Court “axiom[s]”, “general rule[s]”, and “fundamental principle[s]” governing summary judgment. Id., 134 S.Ct. at 651, 656, 660. • Supreme Court precedents require that, “The evidence of the nonmovant is to be believed, and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255, 106 S.Ct. 2505 (1986). That did NOT happen here. • Local Rule 56.1(c) following those precedents was NOT followed: ™ A moving party filing reply suggestions “must respond to the non-moving party’s … additional facts….” U.S.A. did NOT do so. ™ “Unless specifically controverted by the moving party, all facts set forth in the statement of the opposing party are deemed admitted ….” U.S.A. did NOT specifically “controvert,” and the Magistrate did NOT so “deem.” Thus, the QUESTIONS PRSENTED are as follows: I. Whether the U.S.A.’s failure to “respond” and the Magistrate Judge’s failure to “deem admitted” in