United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
J.R. ZIEGLER, Plaintiff,
TWO UNKNOWN 50TH DISTRICT COURT OFFICERS, MEGAN DENNIS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT MEGAN DENNIS' MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS [ECF NO.
VICTORIA A. ROBERTS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dennis (“Dennis”) filed the above motion. She
claims that J.R. Ziegler (“Ziegler”) has no
standing to sue her based on a state court eviction action
that he was not a party to, and involving property in which
he had no interest. Dennis also claims that she was not the
magistrate judge who participated in the state court
proceedings that Ziegler complains of. Dennis requests
sanctions against Ziegler under 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
these reasons and a multitude of others, Dennis is entitled
to judgment in her favor; the Court GRANTS
Dennis' motion. The Court also GRANTS
Dennis' request for sanctions.
motion for summary judgment contained twenty statements of
material facts. Although required to, Ziegler failed to
respond to them. The Court warned Ziegler that “each
numbered paragraph in [Dennis'] statement of material
facts will be deemed admitted … unless specifically
controverted by a correspondingly numbered paragraph in the
statement served by [Ziegler].” [ECF No. 40,
PageID.413]. For purposes of considering Dennis' motion,
the Court accepts her statement of uncontroverted facts.
Court finds that an eviction proceeding was filed in the
50th District Court and Ziegler's friend - not
him - was the defendant in that action. The court assigned
the case to community mediation. Ziegler insisted on being
present at the mediation, but the mediator - who was not
Dennis - did not allow him to participate. Ziegler spoke to
another mediation center employee. This person was not Dennis
either. Guards escorted Ziegler out of the mediation
building. For this, he claims he was deprived of equal
protection of the law, due process and access to the court.
affidavits, it appears that Dennis had absolutely nothing to
do with the state court eviction proceeding. Nonetheless,
Ziegler filed this suit against her and - in violation of
this Court's order that he not file motions before a
certain date - Ziegler filed several papers with the Court to
which Dennis was called upon to respond: (1) motion for
declaratory judgment [ECF No. 16]; (2) motion for objection
and to strike Dennis' response to the motion for
declaratory judgment [ECF No. 20]; (3) motion to compel
discovery [ECF No. 21]; and (4) motion to show cause
“on demand for contempt sanctions.” [ECF No. 23].
asks the Court to enter judgment in her favor. And, because
Ziegler defied the Court's order that motions not be
filed, Dennis requests sanctions.
judgment is proper when “the movant shows that there is
no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P.
56(a). The central inquiry is “whether the evidence
presents a sufficient disagreement to require submission to a
jury or whether it is so one-sided that one party must
prevail as a matter of law.” Anderson v. Liberty
Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 251-52 (1986).
moving party has the initial burden to show “the
absence of a genuine issue of material fact.”
Id. at 323. Once the movant meets this burden, the
non-moving party must demonstrate specific facts
“showing there is a genuine issue for trial.”
Matsushita Electric Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (internal quotations and
citations omitted). To demonstrate a genuine issue for trial,
the non-moving party must present sufficient evidence upon
which a jury could reasonably find for that party; a
“scintilla of evidence” is insufficient. See
Anderson, 477 U.S. at 252. The Court must accept the
non-movant's evidence as true and draw all
“justifiable inferences” in the non-movant's
favor. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255.
Dennis Was Never Involved in Any Proceeding That Ziegler
Takes Issue With
eviction mediation occurred on July 27, 2018. Although Dennis
was a staff member at that time at the Oakland Mediation
Center (“OMC”), she presents uncontroverted
evidence that she was not present at the OMC on that date.
For this reason alone, Ziegler's claims against Dennis
must be dismissed. ...