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)

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-