Amadou Sowe v. Pall Corporation

In preparation for summary judgement the defendant seeking summary judgment provided a list of Statement of Material Facts. The plaintiff replied along with a corresponding list of counter statement of facts. For example if the defendant statement was the manager gave the employee two documents: a separation Agreement, a chart containing job titles and ages of eligible and ineligible employees. The plaintiffs counter statement was that the manager gave the plaintiff a separation Agreement, a chart containing job titles and ages of eligible and ineligible employees, and a letter. In addition, the counter statement of the plaintiff was sworn under penalty of perjury using 28 U.S.C. § 1746. The judge considered the Plaintiff s counter statements not compliant with Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) and hence Deemed the Defendant statements admitted. Question 1: Even though the Plaintiffs counter statement is not accepted because of local rule violation, can the Plaintiffs counter statement still be used to show lack of compliance with OWBPA statute simply because the counter statement is sworn under penalty of perjury using 28 U.S.C. § 1746? Starting with the 2010 F.R.C.P. 56 or Summary Judgment amendment, a formal affidavit is no longer needed for summary judgement purposes. See Summary Judgement committee notes on rules-2010 amendment, subdivision (c)(4). 28 U.S.C. § 1746 allows a written unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement subscribed in proper form as true under