Wilk v. St. Vrain Valley School District et al.
Filing
34
PROCEDURAL ORDER NUMBER ORDER Counsel will meet and confer as required by Rule 26(f)(2) within 30 days from the date of this order. Lead counsel shall attend the conference in person. The disclosures required by Rule 26(a) (1)(A) shall be made wi thin 14 days after that conference. The proposed discovery plan will be in the form of the Scheduling Order which will be submitted to chambers in paper form 10 days before the date of the Scheduling Conference. Counsel for the plaintiffs will te lephone chambers within 10 days after the disclosures to set a date and time for a Scheduling Conference pursuant to Rule 16. The instructions for preparation of the Scheduling Order and the form of that order are found at http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/judges/judges.aspx, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 10/23/15. (ktera)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch
Civil Action No. 15-cv-01925-RPM
ERIK WILK,
DEREK WILK, and
JAMI WILK,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ST. VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT,
JOHN CREIGHTON, JOIE SIEGRIST, BOB SMITH, DEBBIE LAMMERS, JOHN AHRENS,
PAULA PEAIRS, and MIKE SCHIERS, members of the District’s Board, in their individual and
official capacities,
DON HADDAD, Superintendent of Schools, in his individual and official capacity,
GREG WINGER, Expulsion Officer of the District, in his individual capacity,
MATTHEW BUCHLER, Principal of Erie High School, in his individual capacity,
TOWN OF ERIE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
MARC VASQUEZ, Erie Police Department, in his individual and official capacity,
DAN NIEMOTH, Erie Police Department, in his individual capacity, and
AARON HADDOX, Erie Police Department, in his individual capacity,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
PROCEDURAL ORDER NUMBER ONE
_____________________________________________________________________
Seeing that this civil action is now at issue, it is
ORDERED, that counsel will meet and confer as required by Rule 26(f)(2) within 30 days
from the date of this order. Lead counsel shall attend the conference in person. The
disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1)(A) shall be made within 14 days after that conference.
The proposed discovery plan will be in the form of the Scheduling Order which will be submitted
to chambers in paper form 10 days before the date of the Scheduling Conference.
The disclosures must include copies of documents that are discoverable under Rule
26(b)(1) with the exception of electronically stored information which will be described by
category and location.
In complex cases, the parties may limit disclosures to the core documents and provide
for additional disclosures in the Scheduling Order.
Counsel for the plaintiff(s) will telephone chambers within 10 days after the disclosures
to set a date and time for a Scheduling Conference pursuant to Rule 16.
Lead counsel for the parties will attend the Scheduling Conference and should be
prepared to discuss the essential facts giving rise to the dispute and the discovery plan. NO
FORMAL DISCOVERY WILL BE INITIATED BEFORE THE SCHEDULING ORDER IS
ENTERED. Because candor in response to the Court’s questions is expected, attendance at
the conference is limited to the attorneys.
The form of scheduling order to be prepared for this Court is different from the form
included in the Local Rules and is designed to facilitate the Court’s early involvement in the
preparation for adjudication of the merits of this lawsuit.
The instructions for preparation of the Scheduling Order and the form of that order are
found at http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/judges/judges.aspx.
DATED: October 23, 2015
BY THE COURT:
s/Richard P. Matsch
__________________________
Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge
2
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?