Crowe v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc..

Filing 25

ORDERED that plaintiff Crowe's 21 first motion, for extension of time to file her response to summary judgment and to complete discovery and plaintiff Crowe's 23 second motion, for continuance of trial and all remaining deadlines are gr anted as follows, but only under the condition that, if plaintiff Crowe should prevail in this litigation, her fees and costs will each be reduced by 50 percent: (1) the 16 motion for summary judgment is reset for submission, without oral argument, on 6/30/09, with any opposing brief by said date; (2) the 13 uniform scheduling order is modified in the following respects: (A) the pretrial is RESET for 9/11/09 and the trial is RESET for term of court beginning on 10/13/09, with all deadlines expressly tied to these two dates adjusted accordingly; (B) the deadline for completing discovery is extended to 6/30/09; (C) all other deadlines are unchanged. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 6/3/09. (Term: PT-7/17/09; JT-8/10/09)(sl, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

DEANNA L. CROWE, Plaintiff, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08cv550-MHT (WO)

This litigation is before the court on two motions by plaintiff Deanna Crowe: for extension of time to file her response to summary judgment and to complete discovery (doc. no. 21); and for continuance of trial and all remaining deadlines (doc. no. 23). Based on the representations made during an on-therecord conference call held on June 3, 2009, it is apparent, on one hand, that Crowe failed to engage in timely discovery so as to complete discovery within the time allowed by the uniform scheduling order (doc. no.

13), and that she also made her extension requests at the last minute, in violation order other of the provisions `eleventh Crowe in the

uniform

scheduling On the

disallowing hand,

hour' the

requests.

denying

opportunity to pursue this additional discovery could substantially impair her ability to reasonably pursue her claims. Therefore, having considered these factors, the

court is of the opinion that the extensions should be allowed but only under certain conditions. *** Accordingly, it is ORDERED that plaintiff Crowe's first motion, for extension of time to file her response to summary judgment and to complete discovery (doc. no. 21), and plaintiff Crowe's second motion, for continuance of trial and all remaining deadlines (doc. no. 23), are granted as follows, but only under the condition that, if plaintiff Crowe should prevail in this litigation, her fees and costs will each be reduced by 50 %:

2

(1) The motion for summary judgment (doc. No. 16) is reset for submission, without oral argument, on June 30, 2009, with any opposing brief and evidentiary materials due by said date. (2) The uniform scheduling order (doc. No. 13) is modified in the following respects: (A) The pretrial is reset for September 11, 2009, and the trial is reset for term of court beginning on October 13, 2009, with all deadlines expressly tied to these two dates adjusted accordingly. (B) The deadline for completing discovery is extended to June 30, 2009. (C) All other deadlines are unchanged. DONE, this the 3rd day of June, 2009. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE