Doug Duin v. Dale Elaine McCormick, et al

Filing 58

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 2/21/12; The parties filed a Joint Pretrial Statement on February 20, 2012 (JPS), in which they request that this Court order that [related action Allstate Insurance Company v. John Steffes, et al., 2:1 1-cv- 00249] be tried first, to be followed by [this action] at a later date, which is mutually convenient to the court and counsel. (JPS, 2:14-17.) This request is denied.1 The parties also request in the JPS that [i]f the Court does not agree to ch ange the order of the trials... discovery be re-opened for the limited purpose of allowing previously disclosed experts to be deposed[; i]n this circumstance, the parties request an expert discovery deadline date of April 20, 2012. Id. at 5:9-12. Pur suant to the parties request, the depositions of expert witnesses previously disclosed shall be completed2 by April 20, 2012. Further, the parties shall file an Amended Joint Pretrial Statement no later than February 27, 2012, which shall address all applicable portions of Local Rule 281(b) and shall set forth each theory of liability (claim) and affirmative defense which remains to be tried, and the ultimate facts on which each theory/defense is based. The Amended Joint Pretrial Statement shall also address each partys estimated length of trial and how much time each party desires for voir dire, opening statements, and closing arguments. Lastly, the final pretrial conference scheduled for hearing on February 27, 2012, is continued until 1:30 p.m. on March 19, 2012.(Matson, R)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

DOUGLAS C. DUIN,
Plaintiff,

9
v.

10

12

DALE ELAINE McCORMICK; ESTATE OF
ROBERT A. McCORMICK, deceased;
JOHN G. STEFFES,

13

Defendants.
________________________________

11

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:10-cv-02150-GEB-EFB
ORDER AMENDING STATUS
(PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER,
CONTINUING FINAL PRETRIAL
CONFERENCE,

14
15

The parties filed a Joint Pretrial Statement on February 20,

16

2012 (“JPS”), in which they “request that this Court order that [related

17

action Allstate Insurance Company v. John Steffes, et al., 2:11-cv-

18

00249] be tried first, to be followed by [this action] at a later date,

19

which is mutually convenient to the court and counsel.” (JPS, 2:14-17.)

20

This request is denied.1

21

The parties also request in the JPS that “[i]f the Court does

22

not agree to change the order of the trials . . . discovery be re-opened

23

for the limited purpose of allowing previously disclosed experts to be

24

deposed[; i]n this circumstance, the parties request an expert discovery

25

deadline date of April 20, 2012.” Id. at 5:9-12. Pursuant to the

26
27
28

1

This request is contrary to John Steffes’ motion to stay filed
in the related action on March 31, 2011, in which Douglas Duin joined.
See ECF Nos. 18, 24 filed in action 2:11-cv-00249.
1

1

parties’

2

disclosed shall be completed2 by April 20, 2012.

request,

the

depositions

of

expert

witnesses

previously

3

Further, the parties shall file an Amended Joint Pretrial

4

Statement no later than February 27, 2012, which shall address all

5

applicable portions of Local Rule 281(b) and shall set forth each theory

6

of liability (“claim”) and affirmative defense which remains to be

7

tried, and the ultimate facts on which each theory/defense is based. The

8

Amended

9

estimated length of trial and how much time each party desires for voir

10

Joint

Pretrial

Statement

shall

also

address

each

party’s

dire, opening statements, and closing arguments.

11

Lastly, the final pretrial conference scheduled for hearing on

12

February 27, 2012, is continued until 1:30 p.m. on March 19, 2012.

13

Dated:

February 21, 2012

14
15

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
United States District Judge

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

2

In this context, “completed” means that all discovery shall
have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any
disputes relative to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate
orders, if necessary, and, where discovery has been ordered, the order
has been complied with or, alternatively, the time allowed for such
compliance shall have expired.
2