Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment

8/11/2019 Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/order-denying-defendants-motion-for-summary-judgment 1/3

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

CHARLES “CHED” MACQUIGG,

Plaintiff,

vs. Civ. No. 12-1137 MCA/SCY

THE ALBUQUERQUE PUBLIC

SCHOOLS BOARD OF EDUCATION,

et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

This case comes before the Court sua sponte. Pending before the Court is Certain

Defendants’ First Motion for Summary Judgment Relating to Plaintiff’s Federal Claims

(Including Request for Qualified Immunity) [Doc. 76]. The parties completed briefing of

this motion prior to the Court’s March 31, 2014 Order granting Plaintiff’s request for a

preliminary injunction. In its Order, the Court ruled that the public comment segments of

APS Board of Education meetings are limited public fora. This ruling is now the law of

the case. Restrictions on speech in limited public fora are governed by less stringent

standards than those that govern restrictions on speech in designated fora. In particular,

content-based restrictions are permitted in limited public fora.

The Court concludes that the appropriate course is to deny without prejudice

Defendant’s pending motion for summary judgment [Doc. 76] and to permit the parties to

Case 1:12-cv-01137-MCA-SCY Document 132 Filed 09/29/14 Page 1 of 3



2

re-brief the motion. In re-briefing the motion, the parties should comply with the

following directives:

1. Defendants may join in an argument only if they are identically situated

with respect to a given issue. Otherwise, the Court requires a separate discussion for

each Defendant, with statements of material fact and legal argument tailored to the

particular Defendant’s situation.

2. The parties should follow the law of the case as established by the Court’s

March 31, 2014 Order.

3. Each side will prepare a notebook containing all the exhibits tendered by

that side, with separate tabs for each exhibit. The Court will not consider evidence that

is not contained in these notebooks.

4. Memoranda should be self-contained, without references to, or attempts to

incorporate by reference, other papers (other than pleadings as defined by Fed. Civ. P.

Rule 7(a)).

5. In complying with D.N.M. LR-Civ. 56.1 (b), each material fact shall be

separately numbered. Arguments offered as statements of material fact may be stricken

by the Court sua sponte.

6. To the extent that qualified immunity is at issue, the parties shall clearly

identify each proposition of law at the appropriate level of specificity and identify

the specific authorities that bear on whether a the proposition of law was or was not

clearly established within the Tenth Circuit.




3

7. The parties shall pay close attention to the allocation of the burdens of

persuasion at trial as to particular issues and the interaction of these burdens of

persuasion with summary judgment standards.

8. To facilitate adequate briefing, the Court waives the page limits of D.N.M.

LR-Civ. 7.5. Given this waiver, the Court expects closely reasoned, claim-by-claim and

defendant-by-defendant analysis of the issues.

9. The parties shall consult with each other in a good faith effort to stipulate to

which portions of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint apply (or do not apply) to a given

Defendant.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [Doc. 76] be and hereby is denied

without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ re-submitted Motion(s) shall be

due no later than fifteen (15) working days from the date of this Order. Briefing

thereafter will be governed by D.N.M. LR-Civ. 7.4(a).

So ordered this 29th

day of September, 2014.

________________________________

M. CHRISTINA ARMIJO

Chief United States District Judge


Documents

Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment