Smith v. Lamz, No. 02-2130.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtKanne
Citation321 F.3d 680
PartiesMichael B. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Douglas LAMZ and the Village of Algonquin, a municipal corporation, Defendants-Appellees.
Decision Date05 March 2003
Docket NumberNo. 02-2130.
321 F.3d 680
Michael B. SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Douglas LAMZ and the Village of Algonquin, a municipal corporation, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-2130.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Argued December 9, 2002.
Decided March 5, 2003.

Page 681

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Page 682

William I. Caldwell, Jr., Sandra S. Kerrick (argued), Caldwell, Berner & Caldwell, Woodstock, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Thomas G. DiCianni (argued), Ancel, Glink, Diamond, Bush, DiCianni & Rolek, Chicago, IL, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before BAUER, RIPPLE, and KANNE, Circuit Judges.

KANNE, Circuit Judge.


When Michael B. Smith arrived at the offices of the Algonquin Dental Associates to collect donations for police unions and other organizations, he was arrested for the crime of impersonating a police officer, a felony under Illinois law. The charges were subsequently dropped, and Smith sued the Village of Algonquin and the arresting officer, Douglas Lamz, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and applicable state law alleging malicious prosecution. Lamz and the Village moved for summary judgment and the district court granted the defendant's motion. Smith appeals. Because the uncontested facts establish that Smith's arrest was supported by probable cause, we affirm.

Before we relate the operative facts, we resolve Smith's procedural challenge. He argues that the district court abused its discretion in deeming admitted for purposes of summary judgment all the facts set forth in the defendants' statement of material facts. We have considered Smith's numerous attacks on this decision, and find them all unavailing.

Under Local Rule 56.1, the defendants, as movants for summary judgment, were required to submit in support of their summary-judgment motion a statement of material facts, comprised of short numbered paragraphs with citations to admissible evidence,1 which they did. In his response materials, Smith was required to respond particularly to each numbered paragraph and, in the case of disagreement, provide citations to supporting evidentiary material. Moreover, should there have been any additional facts, not set forth in the movant's papers, which required denial of the defendant's motion, Smith was required to submit his own concise statement, supported by citations to the record.2 Smith admittedly did not

Page 683

follow this mandatory procedure. He chose instead—for the court's convenience —to discuss in his brief only the "two or three dispositive issues" of the case, ignoring the remainder of the defendants' statement (see Smith App. Br. at 19-20). In doing so, he failed in his obligation to respond with particularity to the statement of material facts submitted by the defendants. Additionally, Smith sought to support his factual disagreements by affixing to his brief assorted material, totaling over one hundred pages. But with his concern for the court's convenience apparently waning, Smith did not provide the court with appropriate citations to any of it (nor did he ensure that he attached only admissible evidence). Here, he has failed in his obligation to support controverted or additional facts with citations to admissible evidence.

Local Rule 56.1's enforcement provision provides that when a responding party's statement fails to controvert the facts as set forth in the moving party's statement in the manner dictated by the rule, those facts shall be deemed admitted for purposes of the motion. N.D. ILL. L.R. 56.1(b). We have consistently held that a failure to respond by the nonmovant as mandated by the local rules results in an admission. See, e.g., Michas v. Health Cost Controls of Ill., Inc., 209 F.3d 687, 689 (7th Cir.2000).

A district court is not required to "wade through improper denials and legal argument in search of a genuinely disputed fact." Bordelon v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. of Trustees, 233 F.3d 524, 529 (7th Cir.2000). And a mere disagreement with the movant's asserted facts is inadequate if made without reference to specific supporting material. Edward E. Gillen Co. v. City of Lake Forest, 3 F.3d 192, 196 (7th Cir.1993). In short, "[j]udges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in briefs." United States v. Dunkel, 927 F.2d 955, 956 (7th Cir.1991). Smith's summary-judgment materials were woefully deficient in either responding adequately to the defendants' statement or in setting forth additional facts with appropriate citations to the record. As such, Smith's purportedly good intentions aside, the district court did not abuse its discretion in deeming admitted and only considering the defendants' statement of material facts.

Turning now to those facts, we learn the following: On the morning of January 23, 1998, Detective Lamz of the Algonquin Police Department received a telephone call from Karen S. Jurasek, an employee of the Algonquin Dental Associates, informing Lamz that she had just received a telephone call from a man identifying himself as being "from the Algonquin Police Department," who was interested in selling her advertising space in a soon-to-be-published magazine. Jurasek said she agreed to make a $150 donation, and the caller was to come to the office later that day to collect. She told Lamz, however, that her employer had decided not to contribute

Page 684

after all and that she needed to cancel the office's donation.

In response to Jurasek's comments, Lamz told her that Algonquin police officers do not solicit money from residents or businesses and that no Algonquin police officers should be collecting money in the name of the police department. Lamz directed Jurasek to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1106 practice notes
  • Moorer v. Valkner, 18 CV 3796
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • December 20, 2021
    ...facts at summary judgment is a question of law. See United States v. Ellis, 499 F.3d 686, 688 (7th Cir. 2007) (quoting Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 684 (7th Cir. 2003)). [27] Defendants Fanning, Leal, Spanos, Becker, Folino, Benigno, and Szwedo were not personally involved in the alleged vi......
  • Cooksey v. Bd. of Educ. of Chi., No. 12-cv-7180
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • February 19, 2014
    ...any statements or citations that actually refute CPS's statements of facts, the court credits CPS's assertions. See, e.g., Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 683 (7th Cir. 2003) ("[A] mere disagreement with the movant's asserted facts is inadequate if made without reference to specific supporting......
  • Laflamboy v. Landek, No. 05 C 4994.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • November 20, 2008
    ...insufficient to support or defeat summary judgment. See Montano v. City of Chi., 535 F.3d 558, 569 (7th Cir.2008) (citing Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 683 (7th Moreover, a proper Rule 56.1 statement attaches well-organized exhibits that are what the parties claim them to be. The parties in ......
  • Minemyer v. B-roc Representatives Inc, No. 07 C 1763.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • October 27, 2009
    ...moving party fails to comply with the rule, the motion can be denied without further consideration. Local Rule 56.1(a)(3); Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 682 n. 1 (7th Cir.2003). If the responding parting fails to comply, its additional facts may be ignored, and the properly supported facts a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1106 cases
  • Moorer v. Valkner, 18 CV 3796
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • December 20, 2021
    ...facts at summary judgment is a question of law. See United States v. Ellis, 499 F.3d 686, 688 (7th Cir. 2007) (quoting Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 684 (7th Cir. 2003)). [27] Defendants Fanning, Leal, Spanos, Becker, Folino, Benigno, and Szwedo were not personally involved in the alleged vi......
  • Cooksey v. Bd. of Educ. of Chi., No. 12-cv-7180
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • February 19, 2014
    ...any statements or citations that actually refute CPS's statements of facts, the court credits CPS's assertions. See, e.g., Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 683 (7th Cir. 2003) ("[A] mere disagreement with the movant's asserted facts is inadequate if made without reference to specific supporting......
  • Laflamboy v. Landek, No. 05 C 4994.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • November 20, 2008
    ...insufficient to support or defeat summary judgment. See Montano v. City of Chi., 535 F.3d 558, 569 (7th Cir.2008) (citing Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 683 (7th Moreover, a proper Rule 56.1 statement attaches well-organized exhibits that are what the parties claim them to be. The parties in ......
  • Minemyer v. B-roc Representatives Inc, No. 07 C 1763.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • October 27, 2009
    ...moving party fails to comply with the rule, the motion can be denied without further consideration. Local Rule 56.1(a)(3); Smith v. Lamz, 321 F.3d 680, 682 n. 1 (7th Cir.2003). If the responding parting fails to comply, its additional facts may be ignored, and the properly supported facts a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT