Opinion ID: 1318031
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Appellant's Point IV:

Text: IV. Plaintiff was denied a reasonable opportunity to present all materials pertinent to a motion for summary judgment as provided for in Rule 12(c). Rule 12(c), W.R.C.P., to which appellant refers, provides: (c) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. After the pleadings are closed but within such time as not to delay the trial, any party may move for judgment on the pleadings. If, on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56. The appellant cannot be serious in urging this position. In May and June of 1973, Doctors Congress and Stutzman of California had been contacted by attorney Hawkins about this case. It was in those months that they wrote Hawkins about their findings gleaned from Keller's hospital records. The motions to dismiss and for summary judgment were filed in March of 1975. The hearing on the motions was not had until May 9, 1975. In order to avoid the wrath of the court's order sustaining the motions for summary judgment, counsel for the appellant could have filed counter-affidavits by his doctors if in fact they were willing to testify that the Casper doctors and hospital had been negligent. Such affidavits were not filed even though there was more than adequate time for their preparation.