Chewning et al v. Target Corporation, Inc.

Filing 64

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 44 Motion to modify scheduling order; ruling deferred 45 Motion for summary judgment; finding as moot 38 Objections to Magistrate's order and 52 Motion for relief from Magistrate's order. See Order for details regarding new case deadlines and case management instructions. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Corrigan on 8/6/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (JAE)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
LINDA CHEWNING and FLOYD
CHEWNING,
Plaintiffs,

vs.

Case No. 3:12-cv-1086-J-12JBT

TARGET CORPORATION, INC., etc.,
Defendant.
_____________________________

ORDER
This case is before the Court on: 1) Plaintiff, Linda Chewning’s Rule 72
Objections to Magistrate’s Order (Objections, Doc. 38); 2) Plaintiff, Linda Chewning’s
Rule 60(A) Motion for Relief and Rule 72 Objections to Magistrate’s Order of June 3,
2013 (Motion for Relief, Doc. 52); and 3) Plaintiff, Linda Chewning’s Motion to Modify
Scheduling Order (Motion to Modify, Doc.44). Also pending before the Court is
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 45).
The Court reviewed all of the submissions related to these pending matters and
conducted a hearing on August 1, 2013. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court
advised the parties of the Court’s rulings to be included in this Order. For the
reasons stated at the hearing, it is

ORDERED:
1.

Plaintiff, Linda Chewning’s Rule 72 Objections to Magistrate’s Order

(Doc. 38) are deemed MOOT.
2.

Plaintiff, Linda Chewning’s Rule 60(A) Motion for Relief and Rule 72

Objections to Magistrate’s Order of June 3, 2013 (Doc. 52) is denied as MOOT.
3.

Plaintiff, Linda Chewning’s Motion to Modify Scheduling Order (Doc.44)

is GRANTED to the extent stated at the hearing, and is otherwise denied. The
following deadlines and instructions shall apply:
a.

The discovery deadline is extended until November 1,

2013, only for the limited purposes stated below;
b.

Plaintiffs will be permitted to depose Defendant’s

employees, Tim Murfin and Daniel Tuegel. If after completing those
depositions, Plaintiffs seek to depose additional witnesses, the parties
should confer and attempt to reach an agreement, but if the parties
cannot do so, Plaintiffs should file an appropriate motion;
c.

Defendant will be permitted to complete a physical

examination of Plaintiff Linda Chewning. In so doing, the parties must
comply with Rule 35, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;
d.

Defendant shall review its records to ensure it has produced

all documents and information responsive to Plaintiffs’ discovery

-2-

requests, with the exception of requests related to Defendant’s
marketing and advertising. Defendant must supplement its discovery
responses as required no later than August 21, 2013;
4.

Ruling on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 45) is

DEFERRED and the motion is carried with the case.
5.

The parties shall have until August 23, 2013, to confer and file a joint

notice with the Court indicating whether they consent to a date certain trial of this
case by the assigned United States Magistrate Judge. A consent form is attached.
6.

The parties are encouraged to pursue further mediation as they deem

appropriate or may file a joint request that the Court refer the case for a settlement
conference with a United States Magistrate Judge.
7.

If the parties choose not to consent to the Magistrate Judge trying their

case, the Court will set their case for trial sometime during the first quarter of 2014.
DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 6th day of August, 2013.

Attachment: Consent Form
Copies to: Counsel of Record
-3-