Stonington Insurance Company v. Dana Companies, LLC et al
Filing
30
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 3/21/11 GRANTING in part Stipulation for shortening time. Motion to Compel is tentatively set for 4/1/2011 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. (Donati, J)
-EFB Stonington Insurance Company v. Dana Companies, LLC et al
Doc. 30
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 27 28
KEVIN T. COLLINS SBN 185427 collinskt@gtlaw.com M. THERESA TOLENTINO MEEHAN SBN 204112 meehant@gtlaw.com ANGELA L. DIESCH SBN 256253 diescha@gtlaw.com GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 1201 K Street, Suite 1100 Sacramento, CA 95814-3938 Telephone: (916) 442-1111 Facsimile: (916) 448-1709 Attorneys for Defendant Dana Companies, LLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION
STONINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. DANA COMPANIES LLC; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.
CASE NO. 2:10-CV-01372 KJM-EFB STIPULATION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
1 Case No. 2:10-cv-01372 KJM-EFB STIPULATION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL SAC 441,940,510 v3 127352.010100 Dockets.Justia.com
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 27 28
STIPULATION AND ORDER
WHEREAS on March 24, 2009, Plaintiff Stonington Insurance Company ("Plaintiff") filed a subrogation action in the Superior Court of California, County of Colusa, under case number CV23748, entitled Stonington Insurance Company v. Dana Companies LLC, for damages resulting from an accident involving a tanker truck owned by it insured, Rinehart Oil, Inc. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1332(a)(1), 1441(b), and 1446, Defendant removed the action to this Court. WHEREAS the discovery cut off in the above entitled matter is currently scheduled for April 1, 2011. WHEREAS the parties engaged in informal discovery and negotiation in hopes of reaching settlement in this action prior to attending mediation on December 9, 2010. Unfortunately, the parties were not able to resolve the action at the December mediation. WHEREAS on February 28, 2011 Defendant served a deposition subpoena for the production of documents on Plaintiff's insured, Rinehart Oil, Inc., with a production date of March 11, 2011. WHEREAS on February 28, 2011, Defendant served deposition subpoenas with document requests on Plaintiff's insured Rinehart Oil's Person Most Knowledgeable ("PMK"), as well as two of the insured's employees, Dennis Moody and Jack Thomas to take place on March 14 and 15, 2011, respectively. WHEREAS Defendant believes the documents responsive to the deposition subpoena served on Rinehart Oil and its employees, which were not previously produced with Plaintiff's initial disclosures, are necessary for the effective and thorough deposition of Rinehart Oil's PMK and its two employees, Mr. Thomas and Mr. Moody, and are relevant to Defendant's defense of this action. WHEREAS counsel for Plaintiff appearing for its insured, Rinehart Oil, objected to the production of documents counsel for Plaintiff alleges are privileged or otherwise protected
2 Case No. 2:10-cv-01372 KJM-EFB STIPULATION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
SAC 441,940,510 v3 127352.010100
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 27 28
documents or documents that would violate the right of privacy of any third parties. Plaintiff also asserts that many of the requests are onerous, overburdensome and oppressive that the cost involved would be extraordinarily taxing on Rinehart Oil. According to Plaintiff, Rinehart Oil has already produced all documents within its possession, custody, and control responsive to the balance of the requests, and/or the requested documents, although may have existed at some point, had been destroyed pursuant to regulations. WHEREAS on or about March 4, 2011, Defendant served a separate notice of deposition of Plaintiff Stonington Insurance Company's PMK to take place on March 23, 2011 in Sacramento, California. WHEREAS Plaintiff objects to producing its PMK in California for the March 23, 2011, deposition as no witness was available on that date and time, and asserts that the deposition should take place in Arkansas at its primary place of business given the number of potential PMK witnesses to be produced. WHEREAS, at the request of Plaintiff's counsel appearing for Rinehart Oil, on March 14, 2011 Defendant re-noticed the depositions of Mr. Moody, Mr. Thomas, and Rinehart Oil's PMK for March 21, 22, and 23, 2011. WHEREAS on March 15, 2011, Defendant served deposition subpoenas and noticed the depositions of the insured's other employees, whom were drivers of the Subject Vehicle that was involved in the accident that is the subject of this subrogation action, J.R. McCutchin, Fred Martinez, Bruce Johnson, Joe Marin, Johnny Marin, Pat Withrow, Ray Vanderpool, and Tom Applebee. The subpoenas are for March 29, 2011 through March 31, 2011. WHEREAS the parties are attempting to resolve through the meet and confer process the above discovery disputes regarding the production of documents responsive to the document requests attached to the deposition subpoenas for Mr. Moody, Mr. Thomas, and Rinehart Oil, Inc., which counsel for Defendant believes are necessary for the defense of this action and for the effective deposition of each, as well as the production of Plaintiff's PMK for deposition in Sacramento, California.
3 Case No. 2:10-cv-01372 KJM-EFB STIPULATION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
SAC 441,940,510 v3 127352.010100
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 27 28
WHEREAS the parties submitted a stipulation to the Court on or about March 21, 2011 to extend the discovery cut-off to complete the non-expert discovery to May 6, 2011, for the limited purpose of completing the depositions listed above, which were noticed and subpoenaed prior to the original discovery cut-off, as well as to provide additional time to resolve the discovery dispute regarding the production of documents from Plaintiff's insured Rinehart and its employees in response to the subpoenas served by Defendant. WHEREAS good cause exists for, and none of the parties to this matter shall be prejudiced by, shortening the time to notice a Motion to Compel (1) the production of the documents responsive to the deposition subpoenas described above and (2) the appearance of Plaintiff's PMK for deposition in Sacramento, California. WHEREAS the Parties stipulate and agree to waive full notice for a hearing on the Motion to Compel described above to take place on Wednesday, March 30, 2011. WHEREAS Defendant stipulates and agrees to provide Plaintiff with its portions of the Joint Statement regarding the discovery dispute no later than March 22, 2011. WHEREAS Plaintiff stipulates and agrees to provide Defendant with its portions of the Joint Statement regarding the discovery dispute no later than March 29, 2011. WHEREAS the parties stipulate and agree to file with the court their Joint Statement in support of the discovery dispute on March 30, 2011 by 12:00 p.m. WHEREAS, the parties agree to reset the depositions Mr. Moody, Mr. Thomas, and Rinehart Oil's PMK, Stonington's PMK, and up to six of the other drivers for a date after the parties have reached a resolution, or the court issues its order on the document production disputes and PMK dispute, but prior to the May 6, 2011 cut-off. THE PARTIES, THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, HEREBY STIPULATE to the application for an order shortening time on the hearing for the motion to compel and request that the Court grant the application for the order shortening time. Additionally, the parties stipulate the following schedule for the motion to compel: The hearing on the Motion to Compel described above will place on Wednesday, April 1, 2011 at 10:00 a.m.
4 Case No. 2:10-cv-01372 KJM-EFB STIPULATION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
SAC 441,940,510 v3 127352.010100
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 27 28
Defendant will provide Plaintiff with Defendant's portions of the Joint Statement regarding the discovery dispute no later than March 22, 2011. Plaintiff will provide Defendant with Plaintiff's portions of the Joint Statement regarding the discovery dispute no later than March 29, 2011. The parties will file with the court their Joint Statement in support of the discovery dispute on March 30, 2011.
Dated: March 21, 2011
CHOLAKIAN & ASSOCIATES
By: /s/ Jennifer Kung Jennifer Kung Kevin Cholakian Attorneys for Plaintiff Stonington Insurance Company
Dated: March 21, 2011
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
By: /s/ Angela L. Diesch Kevin T. Collins M. Theresa Tolentino Meehan Angela L. Diesch Attorneys for Defendant Dana Companies, LLC ORDER In light of the parties' March 21, 2011 stipulation in support of the application for an order shortening time on defendant's motion to compel, Dckt. No. 28, as well as the March 21, 2011 stipulation seeking to continue the discovery completion deadline from April 1, 2011 to May 6, 2011, Dckt. No. 28, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The stipulation for shortening time on defendant's motion to compel, Dckt. No. 29, is approved in part.
5 Case No. 2:10-cv-01372 KJM-EFB STIPULATION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
SAC 441,940,510 v3 127352.010100
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 27 28
2. Defendant's motion to compel is tentatively set for hearing on Friday, April 1, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 24.1 3. The parties are directed to meet and confer in good faith in an attempt to resolve and/or narrow the disputes between them. If the parties are unable to resolve their disputes, Defendant shall file a joint statement regarding the discovery disagreement no later than 12:00 p.m. (noon) on Wednesday, March 30, 2011.2 Each party's portion of the joint statement shall be no longer than 15 pages, for a total of 30 pages.3 4. If, upon review of the joint statement, it appears that the parties have not adequately met and conferred, the April 1, 2011 hearing may be continued or vacated and/or sanctions may be imposed. See Local Rule 251(d). SO ORDERED. Dated: March 21, 2011
Although the parties stipulate to the hearing being held on Wednesday, April 1, 2011, the actual hearing date will be Friday, April 1, 2011. It is assumed that the parties intended for the hearing to be held on that date since they stipulated to filing their joint statement on Wednesday, March 30, 2011. Additionally, this tentative hearing date is contingent upon the district judge approving the parties' stipulation to amend the scheduling order. If that stipulation has not been approved by Wednesday, March 30, 2011, the April 1 hearing will be vacated. As provided in the stipulation, defendant shall provide its portion of the joint statement to plaintiff on or before March 22, 2011, and plaintiff shall provide its portion of the joint statement to defendant on or before March 29, 2011. In addition to filing the joint statement electronically in .pdf format, defendant shall also submit the joint statement by email in Word or Word Perfect format to efborders@caed.uscourts.gov by March 30, 2011 at 12:00 p.m. (noon). The email subject line must contain the words "Joint Statement," as well as the case number.
6 Case No. 2:10-cv-01372 KJM-EFB STIPULATION IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
SAC 441,940,510 v3 127352.010100 3 2
1
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?