Filed: Jun. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 22, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION TO ALTER PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . 1. The City's prior counsel departed for her new position in November 30, 2015; 2. The City's current counsel did not start until mid-January 2016; 3. Due to the gap of litigation coverage between the prior and subsequent counsel, the City's new counsel needed to address immediate issues on several cases, including full-time preparation for a 4. The parties agree that, in consideration of the fac
Summary: STIPULATION TO ALTER PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . 1. The City's prior counsel departed for her new position in November 30, 2015; 2. The City's current counsel did not start until mid-January 2016; 3. Due to the gap of litigation coverage between the prior and subsequent counsel, the City's new counsel needed to address immediate issues on several cases, including full-time preparation for a 4. The parties agree that, in consideration of the fact..
More
STIPULATION TO ALTER PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER
KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.
1. The City's prior counsel departed for her new position in November 30, 2015;
2. The City's current counsel did not start until mid-January 2016;
3. Due to the gap of litigation coverage between the prior and subsequent counsel, the City's new counsel needed to address immediate issues on several cases, including full-time preparation for a
4. The parties agree that, in consideration of the facts that expert discovery and dispositive motion practice will shortly commence, and that the City's new handling attorney now has had the opportunity to adequately apprise himself of this case, this represents a critical and ripe opportunity to consider resolving this case before costs grow considerably larger.
5. The parties recently began discussing exploring settlement before this case gets much more expensive in expert discovery (disclosures currently set for June 21, 2016) and dispositive motion practice (deadline September 23, 2016).
6. The parties mutually believe that if the schedule continues as currently set, they may lose this opportunity to resolve this in a manner that is economical and fair for both parties.
7. The parties mutually believe that a 30 to 60 day time-period is necessary to give full vent to this process and explore meaningful settlement negotiation and mediation.
8. Subject to the Court's approval, the parties propose the following brief continuance of the following deadlines:
Event Old Date Proposed New Date
Discovery Cut Off May 30, 2016 July 29, 2016
Expert Disclosures June 21, 2016 August 22, 2016
Expert Rebuttals July 12, 2016 September 13, 2016
Expert Discovery Cut Off August 17, 2016 October 24, 2016
Dispositive Motion September 23, 2016 December 23, 2016
Joint Pretrial Statement November 10, 2016 January 27, 2017
Final Pretrial Conference December 2, 2016 February 10, 2017
Trial Brief December 12, 2016 February 24, 2017
Jury Trial January 9, 2017 April 3, 2017
IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.
The court approves the following schedule:
Event Old Date New Date
Discovery Cut Off May 30, 2016 July 29, 2016
Expert Disclosures June 21, 2016 August 22, 2016
Expert Rebuttals July 12, 2016 September 13, 2016
Expert Discovery Cut Off August 17, 2016 October 24, 2016
Dispositive Motion September 23, 2016 December 23, 2016
Joint Pretrial Statement November 10, 2016 April 14, 2017
Final Pretrial Conference December 2, 2016 May 5, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.
Trial Brief December 12, 2016 June 5, 2017
Jury Trial January 9, 2017 June 19, 2017 at 9:00 a.m.
IT IS SO ORDERD.
