Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

KROHN v. EQUITY TITLE, 2:14-cv-00620-MMD-PAL. (2014)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20140721967 Visitors: 15
Filed: Jul. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2014
Summary: ORDER PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge. Before the court is the Parties Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order which requests special scheduling review (Dkt. #23). The Parties proposed discovery plan and scheduling order requests that the court not require discovery to commence until after a ruling on a pending motion to dismiss. Both sides agree that it would be a potential waste of time and resources to being discovery before a decision on the motion to dismiss because if the motion is
More

ORDER

PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.

Before the court is the Parties Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order which requests special scheduling review (Dkt. #23). The Parties proposed discovery plan and scheduling order requests that the court not require discovery to commence until after a ruling on a pending motion to dismiss. Both sides agree that it would be a potential waste of time and resources to being discovery before a decision on the motion to dismiss because if the motion is granted it will likely be dispositive of the entire

Having reviewed and considered the matter,

IT IS ORDERED

1. The Parties request for special scheduling review is GRANTED.

2. The Parties shall have fourteen (14) days from decision of the pending motion to dismiss to submit a proposed discovery plan and scheduling order which complies with LR 26-1(e) as to any claims which survive.

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