Schreckengast et al v. Carollo et al

Filing 176

ORDERED that all motions in limine to be resolved before the October 30, 2017 trial date must be filed no later than Friday, October 13, 2017; responses to such motions, if any, must be filed no later than Wednesday, October 18, 2017; and any notice of a party's intent to reply must be filed no later than Monday, October 23, 2017. If plaintiff wish to oppose this motion, to the extent that it seeks to exclude allegedly undisclosed documentary evidence, they must do so by no later than close of business on Friday, October 13, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 10/10/17. (loh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
JOHN PATRICK SCHRECKENGAST, and
ANDREA SCHRECKENGAST
Plaintiff,
v.
CHARLES S. CAROLLO, individually, and
LANDSTAR INWAY, INC.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CV416-038

ORDER
Once more the parties have come before the Court with evidentiary
issues.

Doc. 175.

Trial of this auto-wreck/personal injury case was

originally scheduled to begin in June, but was continued until October
30th to allow plaintiffs to develop additional injury evidence. Docs. 141
& 159.

After further scheduling difficulties, the Court directed the

parties to attempt a negotiated resolution and inform the Court of their
success.

Doc. 163.

After a month passed without word, the Court

reiterated its instruction. Doc. 168. The parties complied, informing
the Court that they anticipated “no new motions . . . at this time.” Doc.
170. Apparently that anticipation was premature.
Defendants’ current motion alleges that plaintiffs have, again,

sought to introduce undisclosed evidence with trial scheduled to start in
less than a month.1 See doc. 175 at 7. They further allege that counsel
misrepresented plaintiffs’ efforts to schedule the deposition of their
late-disclosed witness. Id. at 12. Those are serious allegations.
Since the scheduled trial date in this case is fast approaching, and it
appears that multiple evidentiary motions may have to be resolved, the
ordinary briefing schedule imposed by the Court’s Local Rules cannot be
observed. All motions in limine to be resolved before the October 30,
2017 trial date must be filed no later than Friday, October 13, 2017;
responses to such motions, if any, must be filed no later than Wednesday,
October 18, 2017; and any notice of a party’s intent to reply must be filed
as soon as possible thereafter, but any such reply must be filed no later
than Monday, October 23, 2017. If plaintiffs wish to oppose this motion,
to the extent that it seeks to exclude allegedly undisclosed documentary
evidence, they must do so by no later than close of business on Friday,

1

Defendants’ motion also suggests that plaintiffs have requested additional records
from Defendant Carollo, and they promise another motion in limine in response to
that request. Doc. 175 at 10 n. 2. This flurry of motions appears one week after the
parties’ joint representation that no further motions were anticipated. Doc. 170 at 2.
While it will not anticipate the resolution of these issues until plaintiffs have had an
opportunity to be heard, the Court is disappointed by the general lack of coordination
and candor evidenced by the current state of this case.
2

October 13, 2017. If they choose to withdraw the disputed exhibits, but
wish to oppose defendants’ request for fees, they must so inform the Court
by close of business on Friday, October 13, 2017, but may abide the
ordinary briefing schedule imposed by Local Rule 7.5 for filing their
opposition memo.
SO ORDERED, this 10th day of October, 2017.

3