Filed: Mar. 14, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 14, 2016
Summary: ORDER MODIFYING PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER (Doc. No. 30, 33) DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . On January 28, 2016, the District Judge previously assigned to this action issued a scheduling ordering. (Doc. No. 27.) That scheduling order provided that "[a]ll named Defendants have been served and no further of service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown." (Id.) On the same day the scheduling order entered, defendant Santos filed a cross-claim for damages against P
Summary: ORDER MODIFYING PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER (Doc. No. 30, 33) DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . On January 28, 2016, the District Judge previously assigned to this action issued a scheduling ordering. (Doc. No. 27.) That scheduling order provided that "[a]ll named Defendants have been served and no further of service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown." (Id.) On the same day the scheduling order entered, defendant Santos filed a cross-claim for damages against Pe..
More
ORDER MODIFYING PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER (Doc. No. 30, 33)
DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.
On January 28, 2016, the District Judge previously assigned to this action issued a scheduling ordering. (Doc. No. 27.) That scheduling order provided that "[a]ll named Defendants have been served and no further of service is permitted without leave of court, good cause having been shown." (Id.) On the same day the scheduling order entered, defendant Santos filed a cross-claim for damages against Penn-Star Insurance Company, Rebecca Desautels, who is allegedly the individual agent that procured an at issue insurance contract, and HUB International Limited Company, which is alleged to be the brokerage house that procured this insurance contract. (Doc. No. 28.) A joint status report, filed by the parties on October 30, 2015, had noted that "Santos Defendants will be filing a cross complaint against Penn Star and the broker who procured the insurance." (Doc. No. 26, 3:17-18.) On January 29, 2016, the day after the scheduling order issued, the Clerk of the Court issued a summons on the cross-defendants Rebecca Desautels and Hub International Limited Company. (Doc. No. 29.)
On February 10, 2016, defendant and cross-claimant Efren Santos submitted a request seeking to modify the scheduling order to accommodate service on cross-defendants, Rebecca Desautels and Hub International Limited. (Doc. No. 30.) On February 19, 2016, a proposed order modifying the scheduling order was submitted as well. (Doc. No. 33.) On February 29, 2016, the action was reassigned to U.S. District Judge Dale A. Drozd for all further proceedings. (Doc. No. 37.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) provides that a "scheduling [order] may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent." Here, the court finds that good cause exists because the current scheduling order does not provide for service on cross-defendants that were named the same day the court entered its original scheduling order, that had been referenced in a previously filed joint status report, and that summons issued on the day after the scheduling order was entered.
For the reasons set forth above, Cross-Claimant's request to modify the scheduling order (Doc. No. 30) is granted and the scheduling order dated January 28, 2016 is hereby modified as follows:
1. Section I of the scheduling order, entitled "Service of Process," is modified to permit cross-claimant to serve cross-defendants Hub International Limited, any related entity with respect to the cross-complaint, and Rebecca Desautels; and
2. Section II of the scheduling order, entitled "Additional Parties/Amendments/Pleadings," is modified to permit the amendment of cross-claimant's cross-complaint to name any related entity.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
