Dawe v. Corrections USA et al

Filing 363

ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 6/14/10. The Court GRANTS the parties until Monday, 6/21/2010 to file objections to the exhibits. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

+

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRIAN DAWE; FLAT IRON MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATES, LLC, formerly known as FLAT IRON MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATES, a Partnership, NO. CIV. S-07-1790 LKK/EFB Plaintiffs, v. ORDER CORRECTIONS USA, a California Corporation; CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL PEACE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION, a California Corporation; JAMES BAIARDI, an individual; DONALD JOSEPH BAUMANN, an individual, Defendants. / AND CONSOLIDATED ACTIONS & RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS / The court issued a tentative pretrial order in the abovecaptioned matter on May 17, 2010 (Dkt. No. 296). Pursuant to that Because

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

order, objections were to be filed within fourteen days.

May 31 was a federal holiday, the last day to file objections was June 1, 2010. 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Plaintiffs filed objections on May 31, 2010 (Dkt. No. 328). These objections list minor changes, seek to add omitted

affirmative defenses to defendants' counterclaims, and reflects amendments to plaintiffs' witness and exhibit lists. Each of these changes is proper. On June 1, 2010, defendants also filed timely objections (Dkt. No. 329). These objections seek to amend the witness, exhibit, and evidentiary issues lists. Per defendants' request, the court will

amend the pretrial order to reflect that defendants have answered Harkins' fifth counterclaim and requested attorneys fees, and the court substitutes the list of defendants' motions in limine for defendants' disputed evidentiary issues. (Defs.' Objs. 2:5 -

3:20). Defendants' initial objections also request bifurcation of trial. request As noted by plaintiffs' response to these objections, the to bifurcate trial was rejected during the pretrial As

conference, and the court does not revisit that decision here.

to defendants' particular requests regarding privileges, to the extend that these issues turn on questions of disputed fact, those facts must be submitted to the jury. Defendants had an opportunity in their summary judgment motion to argue that these questions did not turn on disputed facts, but defendants failed to meet that burden. Indeed, the court has already held that certain statements were not privileged. Order filed Feb. 24, 2010 at 23 (citing Order filed May 20, 2009, at 37 n.14). Finally, defendants made several Defendants' request to submit Defendants may submit proposed 2

requests regarding jury selection. a jury questionnaire is denied.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

voir dire as normal. Defendants have submitted various further amendments to their exhibit and witness lists, and these amendments are in part untimely. Roughly twenty minutes after these objections were

filed, defendants filed a document labeled "amended objections" in the court's electronic filing system. document consists of a second amended (Dkt. No. 330.) exhibit list, This

without

explanation as to how it differs from the first.

Because the

deadline for filing objections had not expired at the time this amendment was filed, the court accepts this list. After the June 1st deadline, defendants filed: * on June 2, a "Notice of Errata" concerning their own objections (Dkt. No. 331), asking the court to use the second of the two exhibit lists filed on June 1, docketed as number 330. on June 3, an "Amended Notice of Errata" (Dkt. No. 332), stating that "pages 6 through 65 [of the witness list filed on June 1] were filed in error" and should be disregarded, and again asking that the court use the exhibit list at Dkt. No. 330. on June 7, a "Reply to Objections" which apparently replies to defendants' own objections (Dkt. No. 333), which asks the court to use "second amended exhibit list" filed at Dkt. No. 334--the third exhibit list to be filed since the tentative order. on June 8, a "Second Amended Notice of Errata" containing an amended witness list (Dkt. Nos. 339-40).

* 15 16 17 * 18 19 20 * 21 22 23 24 25 26

In none of these filings do defendants indicate that anything other than their own carelessness prevented them from filing proper documents within the time provided by the tentative pretrial order. Accordingly, the court disregards the witness list filed on June 8 and the exhibit list filed on June 7. 3 The final pretrial order

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

will use pages 1-5 of the witness list defendants filed on June 1, 2010 (Dkt. No. 329-2) and the second exhibit list filed on that date (Dkt. No. 330). Finally, both parties have requested additional time in which to prepare objections to the exhibits. The court grants the

parties until Monday, June 21, 2010 to file objections to the exhibits. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: June 14, 2010.

4