Filed: Dec. 14, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 14, 2018
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the Court upon review of the Motion for Leave to Be Excused from ADR Requirement filed on December 12, 2018. Doc. 46. Plaintiff seeks an order excusing the parties from participating in alternative dispute resolution in this case. Id. Defendant Financial Corporation of America ("FCA") has not filed a response as the time to do so has not yet passed, but Plaintiff represents FCA opposes the motion. See Doc. 46 at 2-3; se
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , Magistrate Judge . This matter comes before the Court upon review of the Motion for Leave to Be Excused from ADR Requirement filed on December 12, 2018. Doc. 46. Plaintiff seeks an order excusing the parties from participating in alternative dispute resolution in this case. Id. Defendant Financial Corporation of America ("FCA") has not filed a response as the time to do so has not yet passed, but Plaintiff represents FCA opposes the motion. See Doc. 46 at 2-3; see..
More
ORDER
CAROL MIRANDO, Magistrate Judge.
This matter comes before the Court upon review of the Motion for Leave to Be Excused from ADR Requirement filed on December 12, 2018. Doc. 46. Plaintiff seeks an order excusing the parties from participating in alternative dispute resolution in this case. Id. Defendant Financial Corporation of America ("FCA") has not filed a response as the time to do so has not yet passed, but Plaintiff represents FCA opposes the motion. See Doc. 46 at 2-3; see generally Docket. For the reasons stated herein, the motion will be denied.
The parties currently have mediation scheduled for December 17, 2018.1 Doc. 46 at 1. Plaintiff claims he is "fully ready, willing and able to participate in the scheduled mediation," but FCA has indicated it is unwilling to consider class-wide settlement. Id.; Doc. 46-1. Plaintiff thus posits there is "nothing to be gained by engaging in a mediation or any other ADR mechanism at this time," and doing so would only incur costs and attorneys' fees that would "make any potential future settlement that much more difficult." Id. at 2. Plaintiff also argues that Plaintiff would be forced to "needlessly miss another day of work," after having missed a full day of work to attend his recent deposition. Id.
Plaintiff made the affirmative decision to file this action in this Court. It should be expected that Plaintiff would have to actively participate in the litigation, especially as related to compliance with the rules of the venue he chose for his lawsuit. Those rules include mandatory mediation. Thus, despite Plaintiff's argument that mediation in this case would have "zero chances of success," the parties are encouraged and obliged under the federal rules and rules of this Court to set aside any differences and engage in a good faith effort to reach a resolution of this matter. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 1, 16(a)(5); M.D. Fla. R. 1.01(b), 9.01(b). Indeed, the CMSO in this case clearly states: "All parties shall participate, in a good faith effort, in Court annexed, mandatory mediation in order to minimize pretrial procedures and secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this action." Doc. 29 at 12. The parties already have been warned in this case about the Court's expectations of cooperation and civility; in the same vein, the Court fully expects the parties to mediate this case in a good faith effort to resolve or narrow the disputed issues. See Doc. 28 at 8.
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED:
1. The Motion for Leave to Be Excused from ADR Requirement (Doc. 46) is DENIED.
2. The parties shall have up to and including December 17, 2018 to conduct mediation. All other deadlines and directives set forth in the Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 29) shall remain the same.
DONE and ORDERED.
