(PS) Stewart v. Property and Casualty Ins. Co. of Hartford

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 COLLEEN STEWART, No. 2:17–cv–2418–TLN–KJN PS Plaintiff, ORDER v. PROPERTY AND CASUALTY

INSURANCE CO. OF HARTFORD,

15 Defendant. 16 On June 19, 2020, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 61.) Plaintiff failed to respond or submit her own motion by the deadline, and so the court vacated the hearing. See Local Rule 230 (“Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be in writing and shall be filed and served not less than fourteen (14) days preceding the [] hearing date . . . No party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party.”) (citing L.R. 135). Rather than construe plaintiff’s failure to respond as non-opposition, the court set an additional deadline for plaintiff to respond. (See L.R. 230(c) (“A failure to file a timely opposition may also be construed by the Court as a non-opposition to the motion.”) Plaintiff then…