Filed: Aug. 14, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 14, 2018
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM E. CASSADY , Magistrate Judge . The Court has referred Defendant University of South Alabama Medical Center's ("USAMC") Consolidated Motion to Stay Proceedings and Brief in Support ("motion to stay"), (Doc. 91), to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for appropriate action under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter "FRCP" followed by the Rule number); and S.D. Ala. GenLR 72(a). Defendant USAMC motions the Court to stay the proceedings in
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM E. CASSADY , Magistrate Judge . The Court has referred Defendant University of South Alabama Medical Center's ("USAMC") Consolidated Motion to Stay Proceedings and Brief in Support ("motion to stay"), (Doc. 91), to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for appropriate action under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter "FRCP" followed by the Rule number); and S.D. Ala. GenLR 72(a). Defendant USAMC motions the Court to stay the proceedings in t..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM E. CASSADY, Magistrate Judge.
The Court has referred Defendant University of South Alabama Medical Center's ("USAMC") Consolidated Motion to Stay Proceedings and Brief in Support ("motion to stay"), (Doc. 91), to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for appropriate action under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter "FRCP" followed by the Rule number); and S.D. Ala. GenLR 72(a). Defendant USAMC motions the Court to stay the proceedings in this matter until the Court rules on Defendant USAMC's pending Motion to Dismiss, (Doc. 89), in which it asserts sovereign immunity pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment and section 14 of the Constitution of Alabama.
On July 23, 2018, the Court ordered the parties to file a report, pursuant to Rule 26(f), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter, "FRCP" followed by the Rule number), by August 17, 2018. (Doc. 83). Defendant USAMC filed its Motion to Dismiss, (Doc. 89), and instant motion to stay, (Doc. 91), on August 3, 2018. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Howe v. City of Enterprise, 861 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 2017) (per curiam), that requiring parties to an action to confer and submit an FRCP 26(f) report before a district court has ruled on a defense of immunity is inconsistent with the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Bouchard Transportation Co. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection,1 91 F.3d 1445 (11th Cir. 1996) (per curiam), "and other decisions which establish that immunity is a right not to be subjected to litigation beyond the point at which immunity is asserted. Howe, 861 F.3d at 1302.
Accordingly, Defendant USAMC's motion to stay, (Doc. 91), is hereby GRANTED and this matter is STAYED. The parties are ORDERED to file their FRCP 26(f) report within twenty-one days (21) of the Court's final ruling on Defendant USAMC's motion to dismiss, (Doc. 89). Consequently, Defendant City of Mobile, Alabama's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time, (Doc. 92), in which it motions the Court to extend the time to file its FRCP 26(f) Report, is MOOT.
DONE and ORDERED.
