GEHRINGER v. DePALMA, 2:15-cv-11740. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20160505b42
Visitors: 21
Filed: May 04, 2016
Latest Update: May 04, 2016
Summary: NOTICE OF HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DE 26) and ORDER SETTING PREREQUISITES FOR ORAL ARGUMENT ANTHONY P. PATTI , Magistrate Judge . The Court having reviewed the briefs of the parties with respect to the above-referenced motion, and determining that the Court needs additional information in order to make its report and recommendation, the Court orders the following: 1. The parties shall appear for oral argument on Plaintiffs' pending motion to dismiss (DE 26) at a hearing to
Summary: NOTICE OF HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DE 26) and ORDER SETTING PREREQUISITES FOR ORAL ARGUMENT ANTHONY P. PATTI , Magistrate Judge . The Court having reviewed the briefs of the parties with respect to the above-referenced motion, and determining that the Court needs additional information in order to make its report and recommendation, the Court orders the following: 1. The parties shall appear for oral argument on Plaintiffs' pending motion to dismiss (DE 26) at a hearing to ..
More
NOTICE OF HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DE 26) and ORDER SETTING PREREQUISITES FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
ANTHONY P. PATTI, Magistrate Judge.
The Court having reviewed the briefs of the parties with respect to the above-referenced motion, and determining that the Court needs additional information in order to make its report and recommendation, the Court orders the following:
1. The parties shall appear for oral argument on Plaintiffs' pending motion to dismiss (DE 26) at a hearing to be held in the courtroom of the undersigned judicial officer, on the sixth floor of the Theodore Levin United States Courthouse in Detroit, on Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 11:00 a.m.
2. Prior to appearing for the hearing, the parties must comply with subpart (E) of my "Motion Practice" guidelines, which appear on the Court's website (www.mied.uscourts.gov), by continuing "to discuss resolution of their dispute" and filing a "Statement of Resolved and Unresolved Issues" with the Court, which specifically and separately addresses each request for legal or equitable relief which has been pleaded by the respective parties (see DE 4 ¶¶ 36, 43, 48, 53 & 59 and DE 14 at 11-12 ¶¶ A-H) and either stipulates to the mootness of the request or briefly explains the bases for the respective parties' opposing positions with respect to mootness. The parties must also inform the Court as to whether the counter defendants agree that the operation of any exotic animal business on the subject property in the future would violate the "Dangerous, Wild or Exotic Animals" Groveland Township ordinances at issue in this case (§§ 54-1111-54-1116) (DE 31-2) and/or the Rural Estate/Farm (RE/F) District Groveland Township zoning ordinances at issue in this case (§§ 54-111-54-115) (DE 31-1). The page limitation for this combined document is extended from the usual 5 pages to 7 pages.
3. In addition to the items which must be addressed in the joint Statement of Resolved and Unresolved Issues, at oral argument: (a) Plaintiffs should be prepared to explain whether the animals identified in ¶ 9 of the First Amended Complaint (DE 4) meet the definition of "farm products," as set forth in the Michigan Right to Farm Act, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 286.471, et seq.; and (b) Defendants should be prepared to explain whether any of their counterclaims can remain pending for independent adjudication in the absence of Plaintiffs' claims, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2).
4. Plaintiffs must permit Defendants' representative and their counsel to inspect and photograph the "Subject Property" (see DE 14 at 3) on a mutually agreeable date and time, but in no case later than May 12, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. Any photographs taken by Defendants at this inspection must be provided to Plaintiffs and this Court, sufficiently in advance of the hearing by way of electronically filed supplemental exhibits with an authenticating declaration.
5. Finally, Plaintiffs must provide to Defendants and this Court, sufficiently in advance of the hearing by way of electronically filed supplemental exhibits with an authenticating declaration, at least 10 representative photographs of their present exotic animal operation in Roscommon, Michigan, and are encouraged, but not required, to permit Defendants' counsel to personally inspect those operations, in an effort to provide adequate assurances that the exotic animal operation has been permanently removed from Groveland Township.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
