Cecetka v. Lincoln Regional Center, 4:16CV3140. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20190523c64
Visitors: 16
Filed: May 22, 2019
Latest Update: May 22, 2019
Summary: ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The court's prior order, (Filing No. 148), stated as follows: 3) All parties intend to move for summary judgment. As to all parties, the deadline for filing motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, and any motions challenging the admissibility of expert testimony on Daubert or related grounds shall be filed on or before May 21, 2019. Responses to those motions shall be filed on or before June 10, 2019. No replies shall be
Summary: ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The court's prior order, (Filing No. 148), stated as follows: 3) All parties intend to move for summary judgment. As to all parties, the deadline for filing motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, and any motions challenging the admissibility of expert testimony on Daubert or related grounds shall be filed on or before May 21, 2019. Responses to those motions shall be filed on or before June 10, 2019. No replies shall be ..
More
ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
The court's prior order, (Filing No. 148), stated as follows:
3) All parties intend to move for summary judgment. As to all parties, the deadline for filing motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, and any motions challenging the admissibility of expert testimony on Daubert or related grounds shall be filed on or before May 21, 2019. Responses to those motions shall be filed on or before June 10, 2019. No replies shall be filed absent a substantial showing of good cause.
(emphasis in original).
Upon further review, the deadline for filing motions to exclude testimony on
Daubert and related grounds expired on August 1, 2018. (See Filing No. 96). The subject of challenges to the admissibility of expert testimony was not raised or discussed in the telephone conference on May 7, 2019. (Filing No. 147, audio file) The portion of Paragraph 3 which set a Daubert motion deadline was entered in error.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that no motions challenging the admissibility of expert testimony on Daubert or related grounds will be considered.
Source: Leagle
