Dilts et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 79

ORDER denying 72 the motion to stay. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 2/15/2017. (CAB)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION ADAM M. DILTS and RACHEL M. DILTS, Plaintiffs, v. Case No: 5:16-cv-453-Oc-37PRL WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Defendant. ORDER Before the Court is Defendant’s motion for a stay. (Doc. 72). The requested stay, in large part, is based on the impact that a recent illness in Plaintiffs’ counsel’s family has had on discovery, including the scheduling of Plaintiffs’ depositions. Today I conducted a telephonic hearing on this request in which Plaintiffs attended, along with their counsel and Defendant’s counsel. (Docs. 77, 78). Plaintiffs’ counsel stated during the hearing that though he does not oppose the requested stay, his availability has now improved and that the parties plan to schedule dates for Plaintiffs’ depositions after the hearing and also plan to confer on other discovery issues. Given Plaintiffs’ counsel’s improvement in availability and Defendant’s right to pursue its defense, the motion (Doc. 72) is due to be DENIED for the reasons stated here and during the hearing. Lastly, Plaintiffs themselves are reminded, as I advised them during the hearing, that this case will proceed forward. DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on February 15, 2017. Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties -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?