Flores v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., 2:17-cv-01991-JAD-NJK. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20180209d98
Visitors: 17
Filed: Feb. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 08, 2018
Summary: ORDER (Docket No. 40) NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is the stipulation that Plaintiff will submit to an independent medical examination, as well as the agreed upon procedures for that examination. Docket No. 40. Unless doing so interferes with Court proceedings, parties are generally permitted to stipulate to discovery procedures without obtaining Court approval. Fed. R. Civ. P. 29. The pending stipulation fails to explain why Court approval is necessary in t
Summary: ORDER (Docket No. 40) NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is the stipulation that Plaintiff will submit to an independent medical examination, as well as the agreed upon procedures for that examination. Docket No. 40. Unless doing so interferes with Court proceedings, parties are generally permitted to stipulate to discovery procedures without obtaining Court approval. Fed. R. Civ. P. 29. The pending stipulation fails to explain why Court approval is necessary in th..
More
ORDER
(Docket No. 40)
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is the stipulation that Plaintiff will submit to an independent medical examination, as well as the agreed upon procedures for that examination. Docket No. 40. Unless doing so interferes with Court proceedings, parties are generally permitted to stipulate to discovery procedures without obtaining Court approval. Fed. R. Civ. P. 29. The pending stipulation fails to explain why Court approval is necessary in this instance. Accordingly, the stipulation is DENIED as unnecessary.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
