Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

SALOMON v. GARCIA, 2:15-cv-00332-GMN-VCF. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20151223h13 Visitors: 29
Filed: Dec. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 21, 2015
Summary: ORDER CAM FERENBACH , Magistrate Judge . Before the court is Federal National Mortgage Association and Federal Housing Finance Agency's Motion to Stay Discovery (#49). Fannie Mae and FHFA request that discovery in this matter be stayed pending the resolution of their Motion to Consolidate (#48) this action with defendants' class action that Fannie Mae, FHFA, and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation have filed in this District. Fannie Mae and FHFA request a stay in order to reduce th
More

ORDER

Before the court is Federal National Mortgage Association and Federal Housing Finance Agency's Motion to Stay Discovery (#49).

Fannie Mae and FHFA request that discovery in this matter be stayed pending the resolution of their Motion to Consolidate (#48) this action with defendants' class action that Fannie Mae, FHFA, and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation have filed in this District. Fannie Mae and FHFA request a stay in order to reduce the costs of litigation. (#49). Copper Palms Homeowners Association does not oppose the discovery stay (#57) and has been dismissed from this action (#61).

To date, no opposition from other parties has been filed and the time to oppose has passed. Under Local Rule 7-2(d), the failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion shall constitute a consent to the granting of the motion. It would seem that the opposing parties have consented to the granting of the instant motion.

When evaluating a motion to stay discovery while a dispositive motion is pending, the court initially considers the goal of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1. The guiding premise of the Rules is that the Rules "should be construed and administered to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action." FED. R. CIV. P. 1. It needs no citation of authority to recognize that discovery is expensive. The Supreme Court has long mandated that trial courts should resolve civil matters fairly but without undue cost. Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 306 (1962). This directive is echoed by Rule 26, which instructs the court to balance the expense of discovery against its likely benefit. See FED. R. CIV. P. 26(B)(2)(iii).

Here, Fannie Mae and FHFA have sufficiently established good cause for granting the stay of discovery until the Motion to Consolidate (#48) has been decided. No dispositive motions have been filed in this matter.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Federal National Mortgage Association and Federal Housing Finance Agency's Motion to Stay Discovery (#49) is GRANTED pending the decision on the Motion to Consolidate. The proposed discovery plan and scheduling order must be filed 20 days after the Court's ruling on the Motion to Consolidate (#48).

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer