Dunn et al v. Thomas et al

Filing 353

ORDER REGARDING RETALIATION CLAIM directing the the parties' oral request to continue the depositions currently scheduled for 2/26/2016 is granted; the continuance is based on the following agreed-upon representations made by the parties on 2/23 /2016; (1) The depositions currently scheduled for 2/26/16, relate to only the plaintiffs' retaliation claim; (2) the depositions currently scheduled for 2/26/16, relate to only the plaintiffs' retaliation claim; (3) the retaliation claim i s a non-class claim, and thus any settlement of it need not be approved by the Court; (4) the retaliation claim is currently scheduled to be tried in the second phase of this litigation; (5) If the parties are ultimately unable to resolve the retali ation claim, the February 26 depositions will be rescheduled for the latter part of March 2016; further ORDERING that, by no later than 3/4/2016, the parties are to inform the court whether the retaliation claim has settled. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 2/23/16. (djy, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
JOSHUA DUNN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JEFFERSON S. DUNN, in his
official capacity as
Commissioner of
the Alabama Department of
Corrections, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:14cv601-MHT
(WO)

ORDER REGARDING RETALIATION CLAIM
It is ORDERED that the parties’ oral request to
continue

the

depositions

February 26, 2016,

is

currently

granted.

The

scheduled
continuance

for
is

based on the following agreed-upon representations made
by the parties on February 23, 2016:
(1) The parties have reached a tentative settlement
of the retaliation claim.
(2)
February

The
26,

depositions
2016,

retaliation claim.

relate

currently
to

only

scheduled
the

for

plaintiffs’

(3)

The retaliation claim is a non-class claim,

and thus any settlement of it need not be approved by
the court.
(4) The retaliation claim is currently scheduled to
be tried in the second phase of this litigation.
(5) If the parties are ultimately unable to resolve
the retaliation claim, the February 26 depositions will
be rescheduled for the latter part of March 2016.
It is further ORDERED that, by no later than March
4, 2016, the parties are to inform the court whether
the retaliation claim has settled.
DONE, this the 23rd day of February 2016.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson____
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE