Washington v. Duncan et al

Filing 97

CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER: ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Nandor Vadas for Mediation Settlement: ORDER LIFTING STAY. Discovery due by 10/31/2012. Jury Trial set for 2/4/2013 07:30 AM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco befo re Hon. William Alsup. Motions due by 12/13/2012. Pretrial Conference set for 1/28/2013 02:00 PM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William Alsup. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 1/5/2012. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/5/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 TRACYE B. WASHINGTON, Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 13 14 No. C 05-02775 WHA W. A. DUNCAN, Warden, R. BOUCHER, L. HERNANDEZ, E. MOORE, A. GOMEZ, R. PEREZ, L. BAEZ, and W. L. MUNIZ, CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER AND REFERENCE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR MEDIATION/SETTLEMENT Defendants. 15 / 16 After a case management conference, the Court enters the following order pursuant to 17 18 Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) and Civil Local Rule 16-10: 19 1. All initial disclosures under FRCP 26 must be completed by JANUARY 31, 2012, 20 on pain of preclusion under FRCP 37(c), including full and faithful compliance with 21 FRCP 26(a)(1)(A)(iii). 22 2. Leave to add any new parties or pleading amendments must be sought by MARCH 20, 2012. 23 24 3. The non-expert discovery cut-off date shall be OCTOBER 31, 2012. 25 4. The last date for designation of expert testimony and disclosure of full expert reports 26 under FRCP 26(a)(2) as to any issue on which a party has the burden of proof 27 (“opening reports”) shall be OCTOBER 31, 2012. Within FOURTEEN CALENDAR DAYS 28 of said deadline, all other parties must disclose any expert reports on the same issue 1 (“opposition reports”). Within SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS thereafter, the party with the 2 burden of proof must disclose any reply reports rebutting specific material in 3 opposition reports. Reply reports must be limited to true rebuttal and should be very 4 brief. They should not add new material that should have been placed in the opening 5 report and the reply material will ordinarily be reserved for the rebuttal or sur-rebuttal 6 phase of the trial. If the party with the burden of proof neglects to make a timely 7 disclosure, the other side, if it wishes to put in expert evidence on the same issue 8 anyway, must disclose its expert report within the fourteen-day period. In that event, 9 the party with the burden of proof on the issue may then file a reply expert report United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 within the seven-day period, subject to possible exclusion for “sandbagging” and, at all 11 events, any such reply material may be presented at trial only after, if at all, the other 12 side actually presents expert testimony to which the reply is responsive. The cutoff for 13 all expert discovery shall be FOURTEEN CALENDAR DAYS after the deadline for reply 14 reports. In aid of preparing an opposition or reply report, a responding party may 15 depose the adverse expert sufficiently before the deadline for the opposition or reply 16 report so as to use the testimony in preparing the response. Experts must make 17 themselves readily available for such depositions. Alternatively, the responding party 18 can elect to depose the expert later in the expert-discovery period. An expert, however, 19 may be deposed only once unless the expert is used for different opening and/or 20 opposition reports, in which case the expert may be deposed independently on the 21 subject matter of each report. At least 28 CALENDAR DAYS before the due date for 22 opening reports, each party shall serve a list of issues on which it will offer any expert 23 testimony in its case-in-chief (including from non-retained experts). This is so that all 24 parties will be timely able to obtain counter-experts on the listed issues and to facilitate 25 the timely completeness of all expert reports. Failure to so disclose may result in 26 preclusion. 27 28 5. As to damages studies, the cut-off date for past damages will be as of the expert report (or such earlier date as the expert may select). In addition, the experts may try to 2 1 project future damages (i.e., after the cut-off date) if the substantive standards for 2 future damages can be met. With timely leave of Court or by written stipulation, the 3 experts may update their reports (with supplemental reports) to a date closer to the time 4 of trial. 5 6. At trial, the direct testimony of experts will be limited to the matters disclosed in their reports. Omitted material may not ordinarily be added on direct examination. 7 This means the reports must be complete and sufficiently detailed. 8 Illustrative animations, diagrams, charts and models may be used on direct examination 9 only if they were part of the expert’s report, with the exception of simple drawings and 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 6 tabulations that plainly illustrate what is already in the report, which can be drawn by 11 the witness at trial or otherwise shown to the jury. If cross-examination fairly opens 12 the door, however, an expert may go beyond the written report on cross-examination 13 and/or redirect examination. By written stipulation, of course, all sides may relax these 14 requirements. For trial, an expert must learn and testify to the full amount of billing 15 and unbilled time by him or his firm on the engagement. 16 7. To head off a recurring problem, experts lacking percipient knowledge should avoid 17 vouching for the credibility of witnesses, i.e., whose version of the facts in dispute is 18 correct. This means that they may not, for example, testify that based upon a review of 19 fact depositions and other material supplied by counsel, a police officer did (or did not) 20 violate standards. Rather, the expert should be asked for his or her opinion based — 21 explicitly — upon an assumed fact scenario. This will make clear that the witness is 22 not attempting to make credibility and fact findings and thereby to invade the province 23 of the jury. Of course, a qualified expert can testify to relevant customs, usages, 24 practices, recognized standards of conduct, and other specialized matters beyond the 25 ken of a lay jury. This subject is addressed further in the trial guidelines referenced in 26 paragraph 15 below. 27 28 8. Counsel need not request a motion hearing date and may notice non-discovery motions for any Thursday (excepting holidays) at 8:00 a.m. The Court sometimes rules on the 3 1 papers, issuing a written order and vacating the hearing. If a written request for oral 2 argument is filed before a ruling, stating that a lawyer of four or fewer years out of law 3 school will conduct the oral argument or at least the lion’s share, then the Court will 4 hear oral argument, believing that young lawyers need more opportunities for 5 appearances than they usually receive. Discovery motions should be as per the 6 supplemental order referenced in paragraph 15 and shall be expedited. 7 9. The last date to file dispositive motions shall be DECEMBER 13, 2012. No dispositive 8 motions shall be heard more than 35 days after this deadline, i.e., if any party waits 9 until the last day to file, then the parties must adhere to the 35-day track in order to United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 avoid pressure on the trial date. 10. The FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE shall be at 2:00 P.M. on JANUARY 28, 2013. 12 Although the Court encourages argument and participation by younger attorneys, lead 13 trial counsel must attend the final pretrial conference. For the form of submissions for 14 the final pretrial conference and trial, please see paragraph 15 below. 15 11. A JURY TRIAL shall begin on FEBRUARY 4, 2013, at 7:30 A.M., in Courtroom 9, 16 19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, 94102. The trial 17 schedule and time limits shall be set at the final pretrial conference. Although almost 18 all trials proceed on the date scheduled, it may be necessary on occasion for a case to 19 trail, meaning the trial may commence a few days or even a few weeks after the date 20 stated above, due to calendar congestion and the need to give priority to criminal trials. 21 Counsel and the parties should plan accordingly, including advising witnesses. 22 12. Counsel may not stipulate around the foregoing dates without Court approval. 23 13. While the Court encourages the parties to engage in settlement discussions, please 24 do not ask for any extensions on the ground of settlement discussions or on the ground 25 that the parties experienced delays in scheduling settlement conferences, mediation 26 or ENE. The parties should proceed to prepare their cases for trial. No continuance 27 (even if stipulated) shall be granted on the ground of incomplete preparation without 28 competent and detailed declarations setting forth good cause. 4 1 14. To avoid any misunderstanding with respect to the final pretrial conference and trial, 2 the Court wishes to emphasize that all filings and appearances must be made — on pain 3 of dismissal, default or other sanction — unless and until a dismissal fully resolving the 4 case is received. It will not be enough to inform the clerk that a settlement in principle 5 has been reached or to lodge a partially executed settlement agreement or to lodge a 6 fully executed agreement (or dismissal) that resolves less than the entire case. 7 Where, however, a fully-executed settlement agreement clearly and fully disposing of 8 the entire case is lodged reasonably in advance of the pretrial conference or trial and 9 only a ministerial act remains, the Court will arrange a telephone conference to work United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 out an alternate procedure pending a formal dismissal. 15. If you have not already done so, please read and follow the “Supplemental Order to 12 Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference in Civil Cases Before Judge 13 William Alsup” and other orders issued by the Clerk’s office when this action was 14 commenced. Among other things, the supplemental order explains when submissions 15 are to go to the Clerk’s Office (the general rule) versus when submissions may go 16 directly to chambers (rarely). With respect to the final pretrial conference and trial, 17 please read and follow the “Guidelines For Trial and Final Pretrial Conference in Civil 18 Jury Cases Before The Honorable William Alsup.” All orders and guidelines 19 referenced in the paragraph are available on the district court’s website at 20 http://www.cand.uscourts.gov. The website also includes other guidelines for 21 attorney’s fees motions and the necessary form of attorney time records for cases 22 before Judge Alsup. If you do not have access to the Internet, you may contact Deputy 23 Clerk Dawn K. Toland at (415) 522-2020 to learn how to pick up a hard copy. 24 25 16. All pretrial disclosures under FRCP 26(a)(3) and objections required by FRCP 26(a)(3) must be made on the schedule established by said rule. 26 27 28 5 1 2 17. This matter is hereby REFERRED to MAGISTRATE JUDGE NANDOR VADAS for MEDIATION/SETTLEMENT. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 Dated: January 5, 2012. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6

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?