party. E.D. Mo. Local Rule 4.01(E). See Ridpath v. Pederson, 407 F.3d 934, 936 (8th Cir.2005) (where plaintiff did not controvert defendant’s statement of material fact, it was deemed admitted under Rule 4.01(E)). Plaintiff did not directly respond to St. John’s statement of the facts, and did not note the paragraph numbers from movant’s listing of facts. Instead, plaintiff submitted an unverified fourteen page narrative of her claims in which she simply attempts to refute the allegations contained in defendant’s motion for summary judgment, with some citations to the record in footnotes. Some of plaintiff's statements in her narrative contradict her deposition testimony and other statements lack any citation to the record. "The purpose o Bank, 354 F.3d 721, 724-25 (8th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). 2 . "PD — ” refers to the relevant portions
holding that arguments not raised in opposition to a motion for summary judgment are waived holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in applying its own local rules even though those rules prevented it from considering some facts improperly alleged by plaintiffs that might have been relevant to the summary judgment motion holding that claims raised for the first time in an opposition to a motion for summary judgment are not properly before a court holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in striking fact statements that did not comply with the local rules holding the district court did not abuse its discretion by applying local rules that excluded some of the material facts offered in opposition to a motion for summary judgment