Calloway v. Veal et al

Filing 141

NOTICE to Parties Regarding Impacted Trial Calendar and Availability of Consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/14/14. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JAMISI JERMAINE CALLOWAY,

Case No. 1:08-cv-01896-LJO-GSA PC

Plaintiff,

11

NOTICE TO PARTIES REGARDING
IMPACTED TRIAL CALENDAR AND
AVAILABILITY OF CONSENT TO U.S.
MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION

v.
12
C/O W. HAYWARD AND C/O J. OAKS,
13
Defendants.
14
_____________________________________/
15
16

This matter is currently set for jury trial before U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill on

17 April 22, 2014, and the Defendants have declined to consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction.
18 The parties are hereby notified of the following regarding Judge O’Neill’s impacted trial calendar
19 and its potential effect on their trial date.
20

Judges in the Eastern District of California carry the heaviest caseload in the nation, and

21 this Court is unable to devote inordinate time and resources to individual cases and matters. Judge
22 O’Neill must adhere to strict scheduling to best manage his burdensome caseload approaching
23 2,000 cases.
24

This case is currently second on Judge O’Neill’s trial calendar, and civil trials set before

25 Judge O'Neill trail until he becomes available and are subject to suspension mid-trial to
26 accommodate criminal matters. Civil trials are no longer reset to a later date if Judge O'Neill is
27 unavailable on the original date set for trial. If a trial trails, it may proceed with little advance
28 notice, and the parties and counsel may be expected to proceed to trial with less than 24 hours
1

1 notice. Moreover, this Court’s Fresno Division randomly and without advance notice reassigns
2 civil actions to U.S. District Judges throughout the nation to serve as visiting judges. In the
3 absence of Magistrate Judge consent, this action is subject to reassignment to a U.S. District Judge
4 from outside the Eastern District of California.
5

Case management difficulties, including trial setting and interruption, are avoided if the

6 parties consent to conduct of further proceedings by a U.S. Magistrate Judge.

This Court

7 recognizes that Defendants have filed a decline to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. However, given
8 the gravity of Judge O’Neill’s inability to commit to trials, Defendants are encouraged to
9 reconsider Magistrate Judge consent.1
10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

March 14, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff filed his consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction on December 12, 2008. (Doc. 5.)

2