Wade et al v. Churyk

Filing 115

ORDER Regarding September 5, 2018 Conference. Please note the deadlines set forth in the Order. Signed by Judge Holly B. Fitzsimmons on 9/7/2018.(Esposito, A.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
DANIEL WADE and SALLY WADE
v.
BORIS CHURYK

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIV. NO. 3:15CV00609(HBF)

ORDER
A telephonic case management conference was held on
September 5, 2018.
Plaintiff filed this action on April 27, 2015, seeking
compensatory and punitive damages against the defendant Boris
Churyk. In the July 9, 2015, Report of Parties’ Planning
Meeting, the parties agreed that, “A damages analysis will be
provided by any party who has a claim or counterclaim for
damages by February 1, 2016.” [Doc. #11 at 7, ¶8]. On July 27,
2015, Judge Chatigny entered a Scheduling Order adopting all of
the deadlines set forth in the parties’ Report. [Doc. #12]. The
discovery deadline was set for June 1, 2016. Id. On May 11,
2017, Judge Martinez held a conference noting that, “Despite the
close of discovery nearly a year ago on June 1, 2016,
defendant’s counsel stated that certain discovery issues
remain.” [Doc. #43 at 1]. On June 29, 2017, Judge Martinez
entered a second order, noting that the parties had made no

1

further progress in completing outstanding discovery or
complying with the Court’s orders. On July 11, 2017, defendant
filed a motion to compel, seeking dismissal of plaintiff Daniel
Wade’s claims for failure to comply with discovery rules and
requesting an order to compel Sally Wade to produce certain
“documents/records.” [Doc. #52 at 1-2]. For reasons set forth in
Judge Martinez’s ruling, the Court denied defendant’s motion
without prejudice to refiling by no later than February 23,
2018, in compliance with D. Conn. L. Civ. P. 37(b)(1) and Fed.
R. Civ. P. 1. [Doc. #68 at 6-7]. On March 2, 2018, Judge
Martinez entered an order stating in part that, since no Motion
to Compel was filed by the deadline, the parties’ joint trial
memorandum was due on March 27, 2018. [Doc. #74]. Together with
the Joint Trial Memorandum, defendant filed eight Motions in
Limine seeking to preclude evidence at trial. [Doc. #78-85]. On
July 13, 2018, the case was transferred to the undersigned for
all further proceedings. [Doc. #96].
A case management conference was held on July 31, 2018.
On August 2, 2018, the Court entered an Order directing
plaintiffs to provide the following on or before August 31,
2018. [Doc. #109].


Damages Analysis. Plaintiff will also provide support for
the categories of calculable loss set forth in their

2

discovery responses. [See Motion in Limine Doc. #78 at 3-4;
Pl. Resp. Doc. #97 at 1-3].


Photographs, audio recordings, video recordings, and any
other documents listed on plaintiff’s Trial Exhibit list.
[See Motion in Limine Doc. #82; Pl. Resp. Doc. #82].
The Court stated that, “Failure to comply with this Order

may result in the granting of defendant’s Motions in Limine.”
[Doc. #109 at 1].
On August 13, 2018, the Court ruled on defendant’s Motions
in Limine, reserving judgment on two motions [Doc. ##79, 82] to
permit plaintiffs time to produce the information by the August
31, 2018 deadline. [Doc. ## 109, 110 at 2, 7].
During today’s telephonic status conference, defendant’s
counsel reported that he received no production or damages
analysis by the August 31st deadline, renewing his request for
the Court to preclude the evidence at trial. Counsel also
reported that he is working with plaintiffs’ counsel to schedule
a video preservation deposition of defendant Boris Churyk and
does not want to be surprised at the time of the deposition with
materials that were not produced pursuant to the Court’s
deadline. Plaintiffs’ counsel stated he would provide the
materials within two days.
The parties will report back on September 13, 2018, and
provide a date for defendant’s preservation deposition and an
3

update on plaintiffs’ production of outstanding discovery and
damages analysis. Any documents to be used at trial must be
produced at least three days before the deposition or will be
precluded. Plaintiffs are advised that failure to provide a
damages analysis may preclude entire categories of damages at
trial. Defendant may renew his request for relief for
plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s order, on or
after September 13, 2018.
A settlement conference is scheduled for September 21, 2018
at 2:00 PM. The parties’ ex parte letters are due on or before
September 17, 2018 and may be e-mailed to the law clerk at:
[e-mail].
SO ORDERED at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 7th day of
September 2018.
___/s/________________
HOLLY B. FITZSIMMONS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4