Texas Gray Panthers v. Thompson

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

May 17, 2002

Case

Texas Gray Panthers v. Thompson

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. This case was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was briefed and argued by counsel. Appellants appeal from the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Secretary assigning error both as to the substance of the judgment and as to the failure of the District Court to rule on a discovery motion under F.R. Civ. P. 56(f) pending at the time of the grant of the judgment. It appears from the record that the motion was made while the case was assigned to a district judge who unfortunately died during the pendency of the action. After the reassignment of the case, no ruling was entered on the motion until after the entry *543 of summary judgment when it was dismissed as moot. While we do not intend to suggest a result, it does appear that appellants were entitled to a ruling on the discovery motion before the entry of judgment. We are therefore vacating the judgment entered in favor of the defendant appellee, and returning the case to the District Court for disposition of the Rule 56(f) motion, and such further proceedings as may then be necessary. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREE…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.