THOMAS v. THE CITY OF FORT MYERS POLICE DEPARTMENT, 2:13-cv-75-FtM-38CM. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20141201774
Visitors: 7
Filed: Dec. 01, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 01, 2014
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERIPOLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on the Plaintiff, Audenia Nicole Thomas and the City of Fort Myers Police Department's Joint Motion to Enlarge Case Management Deadlines ( Doc. #39 ) filed on November 24, 2014. The Parties move for what amounts to a six (6) to eight (8) month extension of the deadlines in the case management schedule. As grounds, the Plaintiff's Counsel states that he has a busy trial calendar in the Fall of 2014 and early part
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERIPOLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on the Plaintiff, Audenia Nicole Thomas and the City of Fort Myers Police Department's Joint Motion to Enlarge Case Management Deadlines ( Doc. #39 ) filed on November 24, 2014. The Parties move for what amounts to a six (6) to eight (8) month extension of the deadlines in the case management schedule. As grounds, the Plaintiff's Counsel states that he has a busy trial calendar in the Fall of 2014 and early part ..
More
ORDER1
SHERIPOLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on the Plaintiff, Audenia Nicole Thomas and the City of Fort Myers Police Department's Joint Motion to Enlarge Case Management Deadlines (Doc. #39) filed on November 24, 2014. The Parties move for what amounts to a six (6) to eight (8) month extension of the deadlines in the case management schedule. As grounds, the Plaintiff's Counsel states that he has a busy trial calendar in the Fall of 2014 and early part of 2015 and that this case will require numerous depositions and extensive trial preparation.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b), "[w]hen an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time: (A) with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires. . . ." Based upon the docket sheet, it appears that very little has been done toward moving this case forward in the nearly two (2) years since it was filed. Now the Plaintiff's Counsel moves the Court to enlarge the deadlines in the Case Management and Scheduling Order by nearly eight (8) months because of his busy trial schedule. Attorneys are responsible for managing their own case load and an extension of the entire Case Management and Scheduling Order based on the busy schedule of Plaintiff's Counsel does not represent good cause for the enlargement of time to the extent requested.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
The Plaintiff, Audenia Nicole Thomas and the City of Fort Myers Police Department's Joint Motion to Enlarge Case Management Deadlines (Doc. #39) is
GRANTED as follows:
Disclosure of Experts Plaintiff: January 29, 2015
Defendant: March 1, 2015
Discovery Deadline April 1, 2015
Mediation Deadline: March 12, 2015
Dispositive Motions, Daubert, and April 30, 2015
Markman Motions
Meeting In Person to Prepare Joint Final June 25, 2015
Pretrial Statement (Including a Single Set of
Jointly Proposed Jury Instructions and
Verdict Forms (With diskette), Voir Dire
Questions, Witnesses Lists, Exhibit Lists on
Approved Form)
Joint Pretrial Statement July 9, 2015
All Other Motions Including Motions In July 9, 2015
Limine, Trial Briefs
Final Pretrial Conference Date: July 31, 2015
Time: 9:30am
Judge: Hon. Sheri Polster Chappell
Trial Term Begins September 1, 2015
(Trials Before Magistrate Judges Begin on
Date Certain)
Estimated Length of Trial 10 days
Jury/Non Jury Jury
No further extensions to the already elongated Case Management Order will be allowed absent good cause.
DONE and ORDERED
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
Source: Leagle
