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)
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?