Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY v. GREATER OMAHA PACKING COMPANY, INC., 8:11CV270. (2014)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20140506a19 Visitors: 3
Filed: Apr. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 29, 2014
Summary: ORDER LYLE E. STROM, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the motion (Filing No. 468) of the defendant to extend filing deadlines for pending motions in light of rescheduling trial. The defendant also filed an index of evidence (Filing No. 469) in support of its motion. The plaintiff has filed a brief (Filing No. 470) in opposition. The motion is denied; however the Court will extend the deadline until May 15, 2014. First, the defendant has a fundamental misunderstanding
More

ORDER

LYLE E. STROM, Senior District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the motion (Filing No. 468) of the defendant to extend filing deadlines for pending motions in light of rescheduling trial. The defendant also filed an index of evidence (Filing No. 469) in support of its motion. The plaintiff has filed a brief (Filing No. 470) in opposition. The motion is denied; however the Court will extend the deadline until May 15, 2014.

First, the defendant has a fundamental misunderstanding of the Court's direction during the April 8, 2014 hearing. The Court did not state that the parties should "try to resolve their motions in limine" by July 31, 2014. Filing Nos. 468, at ¶6; 469-1, at ¶ 7. The Court ordered all pretrial motions be resolved by July 31, 2014. If the Court extended the parties' filing deadlines until July 31, 2014, the Court could not resolve those motions until later. This is contrary to the Court's order. Therefore, the Court will not extend the filing deadlines to July 31, 2014.

Nevertheless, the Court supports the ambitions of the parties to limit the substantial amount of deposition designations and objections. Therefore, the Court will allow an extension until May 15, 2014 for the parties to meet and confer under the understanding the Court will not consider further extensions.

IT IS ORDERED:

1) The defendant's motion to extend the filing deadlines for its brief in opposition to Filing No. 442 and brief in reply to Filing No. 464 is denied; however, the Court grants the defendant an extension for those briefs until May 15, 2014.

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