Young v. LaPage et al

Filing 247

ORDER Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(e) for Leave to Reopen Discovery and for Status/Scheduling Conference ECF No. 246 is DENIED to the extent it seeks a status/scheduling conference and GRANTED to the extent it seeks l eave to reopen discovery; Discovery is REOPENED until October 25, 2013 for the purpose of allowing the parties to engage in the discovery requested in the Motion; Discovery due by 10/25/2013; 4-Day Bench Trial set for 3/17/2014 08:00 AM in Courtroom A 801 before Judge William J. Martinez. The Final Trial Preparation Conference set for 2/28/2014 at 03:00 PM in Courtroom A 801 before Judge William J. Martinez, by Judge William J. Martinez on 6/18/2013.(ervsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 10-cv-01513-WJM-CBS
JOHNATHAN YOUNG, SR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
JASON BROCK,
Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO REOPEN DISCOVERY
AND SETTING TRIAL DATE

Plaintiff Johnathan Young, Sr. (“Plaintiff”) filed this action pro se against Defendant
Jason Brock1, an employee of the El Paso County Sheriff’s Department, arising out of his
pre-trial detention in the El Paso County Jail during July 2010. After discovery closed and
the Final Pretrial Order had been entered, volunteer counsel entered an appearance on
behalf of Plaintiff. (ECF Nos. 244-45.)
Contemporaneous with counsel’s entry of appearance, Plaintiff filed an
Unopposed Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(e) for Leave to Reopen Discovery and
for Status/Scheduling Conference (“Motion”). (ECF No. 246.) The Motion asks the Court
to hold a status/scheduling conference and seeks leave to reopen discovery for the
purpose of taking up to five oral depositions and propounding up to 15 requests for
production, 15 requests for admission, and 10 interrogatories. (Id.) Defendant does not

1

Plaintiff originally named a number of other Defendants in this action. However, at
this point, the only remaining Defendant is Jason Brock.

oppose the relief requested so long as he is granted leave to conduct the same discovery.
(Id.)
The Court finds that a status/scheduling conference is unnecessary for resolution
of the Motion. Based on the representations made in the Motion, and the Court’s general
understanding of this case, the Court finds that a manifest injustice would result were it to
deny the Motion. Plaintiff was unrepresented through the entire discovery period and, as
a prisoner, was not able to engage in the sort of discovery typical in a civil action. As no
depositions of the named parties or witnesses to the events in dispute have yet been
taken, the Court finds that allowing the requested discovery is likely to lead to relevant
evidence. Moreover, counsel filed this request at the same time they entered an
appearance in this case, thereby minimizing any potential delay or prejudice to
Defendant. Notably, Defendant does not oppose the Motion. Finally, the Court has not
yet set a date for trial and, given the Court’s trial calendar, the next potential opening
would not be affected by the requested reopening of discovery.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:
1.

Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(e) for Leave to
Reopen Discovery and for Status/Scheduling Conference (ECF No. 246) is
DENIED to the extent it seeks a status/scheduling conference and GRANTED to
the extent it seeks leave to reopen discovery;

2.

Discovery is REOPENED until October 25, 2013 for the purpose of allowing the
parties to engage in the discovery requested in the Motion;

3.

Counsel shall file any motion for leave to amend the Final Pretrial Order, including
any demand for a trial by jury, not later than July 31, 2013; and
2

4.

This case is set for a 4-day bench trial to commence at 8:00 a.m. on March 17,
2014 in Courtroom A801. The Final Trial Preparation Conference will be held on
February 28, 2014 at 3:00 p.m. The parties shall familiarize themselves with the
undersigned’s Revised Practice Standards, in general and as they relate to the
Court’s expectations and requirements with regard to Trials to the Court, and with
particular emphasis on WJM Revised Practice Standard IV.B.4.f.1 & 2, which
requires the parties to file Preliminary Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law, along with a Proposed Order for Judgment and/or Relief. Appended as a
schedule to these filings, the parties shall provide key sections from depositions (in
full). This will assist the Court for purposes of context from which key findings of
fact are drawn. All such materials are to be filed no later than 7 days prior to the
date of the Final Trial Preparation Conference.
Dated this 18th day of June, 2013.
BY THE COURT:

William J. Martínez
United States District Judge

3