Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. The California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan

Filing 57

ORDER MODIFYING THE CASE SCHEDULE. Pursuant to stipulation, it is so ordered, with the exception that the trial date remains February 4, 2013 as scheduled, and as jointly requested by the parties in their prior stipulation. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 5, 2012. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/5/2012)

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

Mary E. McCutcheon (State Bar No. 099939)
[e-mail]
C. Brandon Wisoff (State Bar No. 121930)
[e-mail]
Tyler C. Gerking (State Bar No. 222088)
[e-mail]
Richard E. Robinson (State Bar No. 280529)
[e-mail]
Farella Braun + Martel LLP
235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant
THE CALIFORNIA AUTOMOBILE ASSIGNED
RISK PLAN
James R. Carroll (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
One Beacon Street, 31st Floor
Boston, Massachusetts 02108
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
18
19
20

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, a Massachusetts
Corporation,
Plaintiff,

21
22
23
24
25
26

Case No. C-11-1419 MMC
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER MODIFYING THE CASE
SCHEDULE
Judge: Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
Dept: Courtroom 7, 19th Floor

vs.
THE CALIFORNIA AUTOMOBILE
ASSIGNED RISK PLAN, a program
established under California Insurance
Code section 11620 et seq., and DOES 1
through 20, inclusive,

Complaint filed:

March 24, 2011

Trial date:

February 4, 2013

Defendants.

27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
MODIFYING THE CASE SCHEDULE

CASE NO.: 3:11-CV-01419-MMC

1
2

THE CALIFORNIA AUTOMOBILE
ASSIGNED RISK PLAN,

3

Counter-Claimant,

4

vs.

5

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, a Massachusetts Corporation,

6
Counter-Defendant.
7
8

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2, 7-12 and 40-1, Defendant/Counter-Claimant The

9

California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan (“CAARP”) and Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Liberty

10

Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”) respectfully submit this Stipulation And Proposed

11

Order To Extend The Schedule.

12

WHEREAS, Liberty Mutual filed its Complaint on March 24, 2011 (Docket No. 1);

13

CAARP filed its answer and counterclaims on May 20, 2011 (Docket No. 11); and Liberty

14

Mutual filed its answer to CAARP's counterclaims on June 10, 2011 (Docket No. 13);

15

WHEREAS, on July 8, 2011, the Court, following a Case Management Conference, made

16

a Minute Entry (Docket No. 19), and on July 14, 2011, the Court entered a Pretrial Preparation

17

Order (Docket No. 22), which incorporated the deadlines set in the Court's Minute Entry;

18

WHEREAS, on February 21, 2012, pursuant to the Parties’ stipulation, the Court entered

19

an Order Modifying The Case Schedule (Docket No. 43), which modified the dates in the Court’s

20

Pretrial Preparation Order.

21

WHEREAS, on June 14, 2012, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley entered an Order

22

re Discovery Disputes (Docket No. 53), which ordered the production of certain documents, the

23

scheduling of certain depositions and supplemented responses to certain discovery requests.

24

WHEREAS, counsel for CAARP and Liberty Mutual agree that additional time is needed

25

to conduct and complete expert discovery beyond what is currently allowed under the first Order

26

Modifying The Case Schedule, in part because of the additional fact discovery that is currently

27

being taken pursuant to Judge Corley’s Order re Discovery Disputes;

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
MODIFYING THE CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO.: 3:11-CV-01419-MMC

-2-

25319\3168441.4

1
2
3

WHEREAS, Liberty Mutual has separately requested that CAARP stipulate to a one-week
continuance of the current trial date to address a scheduling conflict;
WHEREAS, CAARP is willing to stipulate to a one-week continuance of the current trial

4

date as a reasonable scheduling accommodation, but CAARP will not stipulate to – and instead

5

opposes – any request for a more lengthy continuance of the current trial date if the Court does

6

not grant a one-week continuance;

7

WHEREAS, counsel for CAARP and Liberty Mutual have conferred and agreed upon

8

modifications to the first Order Modifying The Case Schedule, subject to Court approval, that

9

would enable them to complete expert discovery in this action and address a scheduling conflict

10
11

that Liberty Mutual has with the current trial schedule;
WHEREAS, CAARP and Liberty Mutual agree the proposed modifications to the case

12

schedule regarding the deadlines applicable to expert discovery, dispositive motions and the case

13

management conference set forth below do not require a continuance of the trial date, and the

14

stipulated request for a one-week continuance of the trial date is premised exclusively on Liberty

15

Mutual’s scheduling conflict;

16
17
18

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned as
follows:
1.

The dates set in the Pretrial Preparation Order are modified as set forth below:

19

a.

JURY TRIAL DATE:

20

b.

DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS:

February 11, 2013.

Plaintiff/Defendant: No later than July 20, 2012.
Plaintiff/Defendant: Rebuttal no later than August 10, 2012.
(With objections by October 12, 2012.)

21
22
23

c.

EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF: September 13, 2012.

24

d.

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS shall be filed no later than October 12, 2012.

e.

FURTHER STATUS CONFERENCE STATEMENT DUE: October 19,
2012.

f.

FURTHER STATUS CONFERENCE: October 26, 2012.

25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
MODIFYING THE CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO.: 3:11-CV-01419-MMC

-3-

25319\3168441.4

1

2.

If the Court does not grant the requested one-week continuance of the trial date,

2

CAARP and Liberty Mutual jointly: (a) request that the Court grant the remainder of this

3

stipulated and [Proposed] Order Modifying the Case Schedule, and (b) stipulate that, if Liberty

4

Mutual still desires a continuance of the trial date, Liberty Mutual shall be required to file a

5

motion in accordance with the local rules requesting such relief from the Court and CAARP shall

6

have an opportunity to oppose any such motion.

7
8
9

3.

The dates previously set for the above events are hereby vacated. All other dates

set forth in the Court’s first Order Modifying The Case Schedule entered on February 21, 2012
and the Pretrial Preparation Order entered on July 14, 2011 shall remain unchanged.

10
4.

This stipulation and proposed order is without prejudice to either party seeking

11
further adjustment to the schedule.
12
13

Dated: July 2, 2012

FARELLA BRAUN & MARTEL LLP

14

By:

15

Attorneys for Defendant
THE CALIFORNIA AUTOMOBILE
ASSIGNED RISK PLAN

16
17
18

/s/ Tyler C. Gerking
Tyler C. Gerking

Dated: July 2, 2012

SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP

19

By:

20

/s/ James R. Carroll
James R. Carroll
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

21
22
23

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION

24

,
IT IS SO ORDERED. with the exception that the trial date remains February 4, 2012

25
26
27

as scheduled, and as jointly requested by the parties in their prior stipulation.
5
July __, 2012

______________________________________
Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
United States District Judge

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
MODIFYING THE CASE SCHEDULE
CASE NO.: 3:11-CV-01419-MMC

-4-

25319\3168441.4