Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. Ryan

Filing 53

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 52 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re: REVISIONS TO SCHEDULING ORDER (including CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL DATE) filed by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on November 25, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2013)

1 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ,
& SMITH LLP
EDELMAN & DECKER
John T. Burnite, Esq.
2 Julian J. Pardini, Esq.
SBN 133878
SBN 162223
525 Market Street, 17th Floor
3 Stephen J. Liberatore, Esq.
SBN 129772
San Francisco, CA 04105
Tel.: [phone]
4 333 Bush Street, Suite 1100
San Francisco, CA 94104
Fax: [phone]
5 Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
6
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-defendant
7 NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Marcus Daniel Merchasin, Esq.
8 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN C.
SBN 55927
MCCASLIN
Attorney and Counselor at Law
9 John C. McCaslin, Esq.
SBN 204983
582 Market Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94104
10 P.O. Box 160023
Sacramento, CA 95816
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
11 Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
12
Attorneys for Defendants/Counter-claimants
13 DONALD V. RYAN and BARBARA RYAN
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17 NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY,
18
Plaintiff,
19
v.
20
DONALD V. RYAN, an individual, and
21 DOES 1 through 10,

Case No. 3:12-CV-5000-JST
STIPULATION and [PROPOSED] ORDER
re: REVISIONS TO SCHEDULING
ORDER (including CONTINUANCE OF
TRIAL DATE)

Defendants.

22
23

24 AND RELATED COUNTER-CLAIM
25
26

Plaintiff/Counter-defendant NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

27 (hereinafter “Nationwide”) and Defendants/Cross-claimants DONALD V. RYAN and

LEWI
S

BRISBO
IS

BISGAAR
D

28 BARBARA RYAN (“the Ryans”), and collectively referred to hereinafter as “the Parties,” by and
1
STIPULATION and [PROPOSED] ORDER re: REVISIONS TO SCHEDULING ORDER
Case No. 3:12-CV-5000-JST
4822-9010-2550.1

1 through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:
2
3

RECITALS
1.

The Parties, by and through their respective counsel, continue to work together to

4 accomplish necessary discovery.
5

2.

As the Parties have engaged in discovery, counsel for the Parties have cooperated

6 with one another in the identification of witnesses and to make those witnesses available for
7 deposition. The identity of other witnesses, whose involvement in the pertinent events underlying
8 this action were unknown to the Parties and their counsel, have been disclosed during various
9 depositions counsel have conducted.
10

3.

However, counsel for the Parties disputed the scope of certain discovery and, after

11 meeting and conferring in an effort to resolve the dispute informally, enlisted the assistance of the
12 Court by the filing of a joint letter-brief outlining the dispute and the Parties’ respective positions.
13 On November 7, 2013, counsel for the Parties appeared before the Honorable Kandis A.
14 Westmore, Magistrate Judge, and presented their arguments with respect to the dispute.
15

4.

On November 12, 2013, Magistrate Judge Westmore issued her decision granting

16 the Ryans’ request to obtain the deposition of certain Nationwide personnel, one of whom is
17 identified and two of whom must be designated by Nationwide as the “person most
18 knowledgeable” about certain subject; she also order Nationwide to produce certain documents.
19 She denied the Ryans’ request to obtain other documents. In her order, Judge Westmore directed
20 Nationwide to comply with the order by December 3, 2013.
21

5.

Nationwide will designate the “persons most knowledgeable” as ordered and will

22 make them, as well as the person already identified, available for deposition as expeditiously as
23 possible. It is not known whether the persons designated as “most knowledgeable” can be made
24 available by December 3, though counsel are cooperating with each other to accomplish those
25 depositions as soon as possible.
26

6.

The Parties and their counsel further recognize that the Parties’ experts’ analyses

27 and opinions may be affected by the deposition testimony of the persons to be deposed pursuant to

LEWI
S

BRISBO
IS

BISGAAR
D

28 Judge Westmore’s order. Given the upcoming Thanksgiving and the December holidays, the
2
STIPULATION and [PROPOSED] ORDER re: REVISIONS TO SCHEDULING ORDER
Case No. 3:12-CV-5000-JST
4822-9010-2550.1

1 Parties, by and through their counsel, believe it advisable that certain adjustments be made in the
2 Court’s scheduling order.
7.

3

The Parties and their counsel wish to stress to the Court that the present

4 circumstances of this litigation are the not result of dilatory conduct; to the contrary, they have
5 been diligent in pursuing discovery so as to make a full presentation of the case at trial. Thus,
6 counsel have worked together to develop a reasonable schedule of events that will maintain the
7 progress of this litigation and allow the Parties to accomplish all necessary discovery.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, do

8

9 hereby stipulate as follows as request that the Court issue an order in accordance therewith:
10

STIPULATION
1.

11

The Parties, by and through their respective counsel, request that the Court revise

12 the previously-issued Scheduling Order as follows:
•

Final Disclosure of Expert Witnesses and
Expert Witness Reports:

December 9, 2013

•

Completion of Discovery Ordered by
Magistrate Judge Westmore:

December 16, 2013

16

•

Expert Supplement Reports Due:

December 23, 2013

17

•

Expert Rebuttal Reports Due:

January 6, 2014

18

•

Expert Discovery Cut-off:

January 17, 2014

19

•

Deadline to File Dispositive Motions:

February 7, 2014

20

•

Hearing re: Dispositive Motions:

March 21, 2014

21

•

Pretrial Conference Statement due:

April 1, 2014

22

•

Pretrial Conference:

April 11, 2014

23

•

Trial:

April 28, 2014
(time estimate: 12-15 days)

13
14
15

24
2.

25

If the Court is unable to accommodate the Parties’ requested revisions to the

26 Scheduling Order, the Parties request that the Court schedule a case management conference so
27 that other adjustments may be discussed and, with the Court’s approval, made in the Scheduling

LEWI
S

BRISBO
IS

BISGAAR
D

28 Order.
3
STIPULATION and [PROPOSED] ORDER re: REVISIONS TO SCHEDULING ORDER
Case No. 3:12-CV-5000-JST
4822-9010-2550.1

1

This stipulation is respectfully submitted by:

2 DATED: November 20, 2013

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH

LLP

3
By:
4
5

/s/ Stephen J. Liberatore
.
Julian J. Pardini
Stephen J. Liberatore
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-defendant
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

6
7 DATED: November 20, 2013

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DECKER

8
By:
9
10

/s/ John T. Burnite
.
John T. Burnite
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-defendant
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

11
12

DATED: November 20, 2013

13

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN C. MCCASLIN
By:

/s/ John C. McCaslin
John C. McCaslin
Attorney for Defendant
DONALD V. RYAN

By:

/s/ Marcus Daniel Merchasin
Marcus Daniel Merchasin
Attorney for Defendant
DONALD V. RYAN

14
15

.

16
17

DATED: November 20, 2013

18
19
20

ORDER

21

Based on the foregoing stipulation of the Parties and their proposed revisions to the

22 Court’s scheduling order, and finding good cause therefor,
23

THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS AND DECREES that the previously-issued

24 Scheduling Order be, and hereby is, MODIFIED as follows:
25
26

•

Final Disclosure of Expert Witnesses and
Expert Witness Reports:

December 9, 2013

•

Completion of Discovery Ordered by
Magistrate Judge Westmore:

December 16, 2013

•

Expert Supplement Reports Due:

December 23, 2013

27

LEWI
S

BRISBO
IS

BISGAAR
D

28

4
STIPULATION and [PROPOSED] ORDER re: REVISIONS TO SCHEDULING ORDER
Case No. 3:12-CV-5000-JST
4822-9010-2550.1

.

1

•

Expert Rebuttal Reports Due:

January 6, 2014

2

•

Expert Discovery Cut-off:

January 17, 2014

3

•

Deadline to File Dispositive Motions:

•

Hearing re: Dispositive Motions:

March 21, 2014

•

Pretrial Conference Statement due:

April 1, 2014

•

Pretrial Conference:

April 11, 2014

•

Trial:

April 28, 2014
(time estimate: 12-15 days)

4
5
6
7
8

February 7, 2014
March 3, 2014

9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
DATED: November 25, 2013
11
12

___________________________________
John S. Tigar, United States District Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of California

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

LEWI
S

BRISBO
IS

BISGAAR
D

28
5
STIPULATION and [PROPOSED] ORDER re: REVISIONS TO SCHEDULING ORDER
Case No. 3:12-CV-5000-JST
4822-9010-2550.1