Duncan et al v. Esquibel et al
Filing
30
MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 29 Unopposed Motion to Stay Pending Deadlines; denying without prejudice 21 Combined Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum; denying without prejudice 23 Nate Esqibel's Motion for Sum mary Judgment Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P56(a); denying without prejudice 24 Roger Whinery's Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.56(a). Final Pretrial Conference set for 5/23/2016 is VACATED. Dismissal Papers due on or before 5/13/2016, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 4/11/2016.(slibi, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 15-cv-00759-MEH
JOHN DUNCAN,
DIANNA HARRIS, and
DAKOTA DUNCAN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
NATE ESQUIBEL,
ROGER WHINERY, and
KEVIN STURCH,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 11, 2016.
Before the Court is a Notice of Settlement and Unopposed Motion to Stay Pending Deadlines
[filed April 10, 2016; docket #29]. The motion is granted in part and denied in part as follows.
In light of the notice of settlement, Kevin Sturch’s Combined Motion for Summary Judgment
and Memorandum [filed March 4, 2016; docket # 21], Nate Esquibel’s Motion for Summary
Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a) [filed March 4, 2016; docket #23], and Roger Whinery’s
Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a) [filed March 4, 2016; docket #24]
are denied without prejudice with leave to re-file if the settlement is not finalized.
In addition, the Final Pretrial Conference currently set for May 23, 2016 is vacated, but will
be rescheduled if the settlement is not finalized.
Finally, the parties shall file dismissal papers with the Court on or before May 13, 2016.
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?