Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01120/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01120-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

I 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

In re: MARCUS LEE WHITNEY, 

Plaintiff-Debtor. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

-------------------------------) 

GLASS AND ASSOCIATES, a 

Colorado Partnership, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

FI LED 

Uflited States Court of Appeals 

T!"~th (:i,.~,,i~ 

SEP 2 6 1989 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

v. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 89-1120 

(D.C. No. 88-F-1945) 

(D. Colorado) 

MARCUS LEE WHITNEY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Submitted on the Briefs: 

Before LOGAN, MOORE, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-1120 Document: 01019973993 Date Filed: 09/26/1989 Page: 1 
I 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Our review discloses the district court did not err in 

affirming the judgment of the bankruptcy court. We specifically 

note appellant's contention that he was deprived of the 

opportunity to present evidence in the bankruptcy court is a 

consequence of his own failure. A party resisting a motion for 

summary judgment cannot rest upon the pleadings, but must disclose 

to the court, by affidavit or otherwise, the existence of disputed 

facts. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7056; Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e); Lake 

Heffner Open Space Alliance v. Dole, 871 F.2d 943, 945 (10th Cir. 

1989); see also Conaway v. Smith, 853 F .2d 789, 792 (10th Cir. 

1988). Mr. Whitney did not comply with this duty and thus cannot 

s t and upon the proposition there is a genuine dispute of fact. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). See generally _D_a_r_t __ I_n_d_u_s_._, __ I_n_c_._v_. 

Plunkett Co. of Okla., 704 F.2d 496, 498 (10th Cir. 1983). The 

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED for the reasons set 

forth in its memorandum and order of March 28, 1989. The ma n date 

shall issu e forthwith. 

Entered for the Court 

John P. Moore 

Circuit Judge 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-1120 Document: 01019973993 Date Filed: 09/26/1989 Page: 2