Travelers Indemnity Company v. Excalibur Reinsurance Corporation

Filing 143

ORDER and SCHEDULING ORDER removing stay on proceedings and revising case deadlines (see attached) in consideration of 130 Plaintiff's Motion to Modify Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on 03/26/2014. (Wang, S.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY as successor in interest to GULF INSURANCE COMPANY, 3:11 - CV- 1209 (CSH) Plaintiff, v. EXCALIBUR REINSURANCE CORPORATION f/k/a CAPITAL INSURANCE COMPANY, MARCH 26, 2014 Defendant. RULING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER HAIGHT, Senior District Judge: Plaintiff Travelers has filed the present motion [Doc. 130] to modify the Court's previously entered Scheduling Order [Doc. 67]. Much of the circumstances in existence at that earlier time have been changed or no longer exist. Specifically, Plaintiff's motion for a prejudgment remedy was denied as moot; Plaintiff's motion for pre-pleading security was granted; Plaintiff and Defendant Excalibur agreed upon the amount of security Excalibur should post; and Excalibur has posted that security. Travelers' present motion correctly asserts that a stay of proceedings is no longer appropriate. In consequence, Plaintiff's motion [Doc. 130] to modify the Court's Scheduling Order [Doc. 67] is GRANTED. The Court makes the following Revised Scheduling Order: 1. All discovery, including expert-witness discovery if any is intended, shall be completed on or before May 16, 2014. 2. Any dispositive motions shall be filed not later than June 6, 2014. 3. The joint trial memorandum shall be filed on June 30, 2014, or 21 calendar days after the Court's decision on any dispositive motion, whichever last occurs. 4. The case will be marked Trial Ready seven (7) calendar days after the filing of the joint trial memorandum. 5. If counsel for the parties are in a position to agree and stipulate at the present time that no dispositive motions will be filed by either party after completion of discovery, counsel are directed to advise the Court to that effect forthwith, and a further revision of this Revised Scheduling Order can then be considered. It is SO ORDERED. Dated: New Haven, Connecticut March 26, 2014 /s/Charles S. Haight, Jr. CHARLES S. HAIGHT, JR. Senior United States District Judge

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?