Quinn v. Fresno County Sheriff et al

Filing 156

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTIONS TO AMEND THE PRETRIAL ORDER signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on August 3, 2012. (Munoz, I)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES LORAN QUINN, 12 13 14 Case No. 1:10-cv-01617 LJO BAM Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE MOTIONS TO AMEND THE PRETRIAL ORDER vs. FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al., 15 (Docs. 124 & 129) Defendants. 16 / 17 Pending before the Court are two motions filed by Plaintiff to amend the pretrial order. First, 18 on July 25, 2012, Plaintiff moved to include Wade Mangiarelli in his trial witness list. In response, the 19 Court indicated that Plaintiff’s request would be granted on condition that Wade Mangiarelli would be 20 made available for deposition by no later than August 1, 2012, and that Plaintiff would pay the cost of 21 obtaining expedited deposition transcripts. These conditions were aimed at curing any prejudice that 22 Defendants might incur as a result of Plaintiff’s late addition. On July 31, 2012, Plaintiff notified the 23 Court that he agreed to the conditions and that the parties had stipulated to holding Wade Mangiarelli’s 24 deposition on August 1, 2012, at 9:00 a.m.1 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s July 25, 2012, ex parte motion to 25 amend the pretrial order (Doc. 124) is GRANTED. 26 1 27 28 In its order, the Court instructed Plaintiff to file and serve notice of whether he agreed to the Court’s conditions by no later than noon on July 30, 2012. (Doc. 128 at 3.) Plaintiff, however, did not notify the Court of his decision until one day past the deadline, on July 31, 2012. This is the second time the Court has had to admonish Plaintiff’s counsel for failing to abide by Court deadlines. (See Doc. 103 at 6.) Plaintiff’s counsel is placed on notice that any further untimeliness on his part will be grounds for sanctions. 1 1 Second, on July 27, 2012, Plaintiff moved to include the deposition testimony of Dr. Khoi Lee 2 and Dr. Lorie DeCarvalho in his list of discovery documents that may be used at trial. On July 31, 2012, 3 Defendants responded that they do not oppose Plaintiff’s motion so long as their counter-designations 4 to the deposition testimony are accepted one day late.2 Good cause appearing and seeing no prejudice 5 to either party, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s July 27, 2012, ex parte motion to amend the pretrial order 6 (Doc. 129), and accepts Defendants’ counter-designations. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 Dated: b9ed48 August 3, 2012 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 The deadline for counter-designations was set for July 30, 2012. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?