Starr Indemnity & Liability Company v. YRC Inc. et al

Filing 14

STIPULATION and ORDER GRANTING the parties' request to modify the Scheduling Order, document 10 , issued on 2/6/2014, as follows: Non-Expert Discovery due by 10/10/2014; Designation of Expert Witnesses due by 10/10/2014; Rebuttal Expert Desig nation due by 10/24/2014; Expert Discovery due by 11/21/2014; Non-Dispositive Motions filed by 11/24/2014; and Dispositive Motions filed by 1/2/2015. The pretrial conference and trial dates are VACATED and will be reset, if necessary, after a ruling on the dispositive motions. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 8/28/2014. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Kathleen C. Jeffries (State Bar #110362)
SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON & FEARY, LLP
2 North Lake Avenue, Suite 460
Pasadena, California 91101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
YRC INC. and ROADWAY REVERSE LOGISTICS, INC.

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY
COMPANY, a corporation,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
YRC INC., a corporation; ROADWAY )
REVERSE LOGISTICS, INC., a
)
corporation; and DOES ONE through )
FIFTEEN,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________ )

Case No. 1:13−CV−01996−AWI−GSA
STIPULATION RE FURTHER
EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY
DEADLINES AND CORRESPONDING
EXTENSION OF MOTION-FILING
DEADLINE; AND ORDER THEREON
Trial Date: March 24, 2015

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this

19

action, plaintiff Starr Indemnity & Liability Company (“Starr Indemnity”) and

20

defendants YRC Inc. (“YRC”) and Roadway Reverse Logistics, Inc. (collectively

21

“defendants”), through their respective counsel of record, that the discovery

22

deadlines in this case be extended an additional month to enable the parties

23

to complete discovery, the progress of which has been hampered to date by a

24

failure of cooperation of an essential third party, as more fully described

25

below; and that the motion-filing deadline be correspondingly extended.

26
27
28

1
_____________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY AND MOTION-FILING DEADLINES;
AND ORDER THEREON

1

Specifically, the parties respectfully request that the non-expert

2

discovery cut-off and expert disclosure date be continued from September 8,

3

2014 to October 10, 2014; that the rebuttal expert disclosure deadline be

4

continued from September 22, 2014 to October 24, 2014; that the expert

5

discovery cut-off date be continued from October 20, 2014 to November 21,

6

2014; and that, based upon such continuances, the date for the filing of non-

7

dispositive and dispositive motions be continued from October 24, 2014 to

8

November 24, 2014, with the pretrial conference and trial dates and all other

9

orders contained in the Court’s scheduling order issued on February 14, 2014

10

remaining in full force and effect.
Good cause exists for this joint request. This case involves a

11
12

request for reimbursement by plaintiff Starr Indemnity of sums paid to its

13

insured for the alleged damage to two pieces of machinery transported by

14

defendant YRC from Clovis, California to Chandler, Arizona in October 2012.

15

Having coordinated the plans with plaintiff, defendants served deposition

16

subpoenas upon three witnesses from the company from whom the machinery

17

was received to address factual questions central to defendants’ defense

18

position. However, none of the witnesses appeared for the scheduled

19

depositions or notified counsel that no witnesses would appear. Steps are now

20

being taken to reschedule such depositions and/or to gather the necessary

21

information informally. Plaintiff’s counsel has agreed to hold its noticed Rule

22

30(b)(6) deposition of defendant YRC in abeyance until the completion of such

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

2
_____________________________________________________________________________

28

STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY AND MOTION-FILING DEADLINES;
AND ORDER THEREON

1

non-party discovery process, provided that the requested extensions are

2

granted. The parties seek additional time to complete both steps, with the aim

3

of resolving the case through the use of the information gathered in such

4

process.

5
6

Dated: August 22, 2014

7
8

SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON
& FEARY, LLP

By:

9
10
11
12

Dated: August 21, 2014

/s/ Kathleen C. Jeffries
Kathleen C. Jeffries
Attorneys for Defendants
YRC INC. and ROADWAY REVERSE
LOGISTICS, INC.

GIBSON ROBB & LINDH, LLP

13
By:

14
15
16

/s/ Konstantin Savransky (as
authorized on August 21, 2014)
Konstantin Savransky
Attorneys for Plaintiff
STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY
COMPANY

17
18

ORDER

19

The Court has reviewed the joint request and adopts the parties’

20

stipulation in part. The Court has made slight modifications to the deadlines

21

because the dates proposed by the parties affect the pretrial and the trial

22

dates.1 Accordingly, the scheduling order issued on February 6, 2014 (Doc.

23

10) is modified as follows:

24

The non-expert discovery cut-off is October 10, 2014;

25
26
27
28

1

The Court requires certain spacing between the filing of motions so that there is ample time for rulings to be
made.

3
_____________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY AND MOTION-FILING DEADLINES;
AND ORDER THEREON

1

The expert disclosure deadline is October 10, 2014;

2

The rebuttal expert is October 24, 2014;

3

The expert discovery cut-off date is November 21, 2014;

4

The deadline for filing non-dispositive motions is November 24, 2014;

5

The deadline for filing dispositive motions is January 2, 2015.

6
7

The pretrial conference and the trial dates are VACATED and will be reset
after a ruling on the dispositive motions.

8

All other orders contained in the Court’s scheduling order issued on

9

February 14, 2014 (Doc. 10) remain in full force and effect. A review of this

10

case indicates that it may be ripe for settlement once the discovery is

11

completed. The parties are strongly encouraged to notify the Court if

12

settlement is a viable option.

13

Dated: August 28, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
_____________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY AND MOTION-FILING DEADLINES;
AND ORDER THEREON