Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

E.R. ex rel. Young v. Sutter Davis Hospital, 2:14-CV-02053-WBS-CKD. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20161121722 Visitors: 8
Filed: Nov. 17, 2016
Latest Update: Nov. 17, 2016
Summary: REVISED STIPULATION AND [ PROPOSED ] ORDER SETTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING SCHEDULE REGARDING UNITED STATES' MOTION FOR SUMMARYJUDGMENT ON SUTTER DAVIS HOSPITAL'S THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS FOR INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . The parties hereby stipulate and propose to modify the supplemental briefing schedule on the United States' motion for summary judgment such that the hearing on the motion can resume and be concluded by November 28, 2016. The parties to this mo
More

REVISED STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING SCHEDULE REGARDING UNITED STATES' MOTION FOR SUMMARYJUDGMENT ON SUTTER DAVIS HOSPITAL'S THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS FOR INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION

The parties hereby stipulate and propose to modify the supplemental briefing schedule on the United States' motion for summary judgment such that the hearing on the motion can resume and be concluded by November 28, 2016. The parties to this motion propose that supplemental briefs be filed on or before November 18, 2016, and the United States file any response brief on or before November 23, and that the hearing be continued on November 28, 2016, at 1:30 p.m.

The United States filed its Motion for Summary Judgment regarding Third Party Plaintiff Sutter Davis Hospital's Claims for Indemnity and Contribution on October 17, 2016. (See Dkt. No. 37). Sutter Davis Hospital filed its opposition October 28 and the United States replied on November 7, 2016. (See Dkt. Nos. 40 & 42). No other party filed any papers regarding this motion, which solely concerns Sutter Davis Hospital's third party claim against the United States.

On November 14, 2016, the Court held a hearing on the United States' Motion for Summary Judgment regarding Third Party Plaintiff Sutter Davis Hospital's Claims for Indemnity and Contribution. (See Dkt. No. 44). The Court indicated a desire for supplemental briefing on causation at that hearing, but the parties had difficulty articulating a workable schedule. The Court issued a minute order following the hearing permitting supplemental briefing by November 28, the United States to file a response by December 19, and any replies brief by January 3, 2017. (Dkt. No. 44). This would put the hearing date on or near the time for the parties to make pre-trial disclosures and file their pretrial statements, all while this dispositive motion is still pending.

Since the hearing, the parties have had the opportunity to meet and confer and have agreed upon a schedule that would permit this matter to be fully briefed and concluded in a more timely fashion. Because there are limited materials to review regarding causation, and because the parties wish to have this matter resolved in advance of trial preparation, the parties have stipulated to, and propose, the following supplemental briefing schedule:

1. Supplemental briefs shall be filed on or before November 18, 2016;

2. The United States shall file any responsive brief on or before November 23, 2016; and

3. The hearing shall resume on November 28, 2016, at 1:30 p.m.

This schedule will permit the Court to receive the supplemental briefing, hear arguments on this matter, and render a decision sufficiently in advance of trial (and trial preparation), and in keeping with the Scheduling Order adopted in this case in September 2015. (See Dkt. No. 24). This will conserve the parties' resources and the Court's by promoting an orderly resolution of the United States' motion against Sutter Davis Hospital's claim, which has already been the subject of full summary judgment briefing and a lengthy oral argument.

Because this schedule will promote the orderly resolution of this matter, conserve the resources of the parties and the Court, hew more closely to the long-standing Scheduling Order, and allow the parties to prepare for trial with a clear view of which claims are still in the case, if any. This is particularly important where claims against some defendants will be tried to a jury, but where the third party claim against the United States (which is the only claim against the United States in this action) must be tried to the Court, not a jury. See 28 U.S.C. § 2402 (claims under FTCA "shall be tried by the court without a jury.").

LA FOLLETTE, JOHNSON, DE HAAS, FESLER & AMES By: /s/Larry Thornton (authorized 11/15/2016) LARRY THORNTON Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant SUTTER DAVIS HOSPTIAL SCHUERING ZIMMERMAN & DOYLE By: /s/Kat Todd (authorized 11/16/2016) KAT TODD Attorneys for Defendants SUTTER WEST WOMEN'S HEALTH & SUSAN MAAYAH, M.D. RICE & BLOOMFIELD, LLP By: /s/Linda Fermoyle Rice (authorized 11/16/2016) LINDA FERMOYLE RICE Attorneys for Plaintiff E.R.

Good cause appearing, IT IS SO ORDERED.

The November 14, 2016, minute order regarding supplemental briefing (Dkt. No. 44) is hereby modified such that:

1. Supplemental briefs shall be filed on or before November 18, 2016;

2. The United States shall file any responsive brief on or before November 23, 2016; and

3. The hearing shall resume on November 28, 2016, at 1:30 p.m.

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