CITIZENS INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST, AS SUBROGEE OF WILLIAM MAGEE v. LC ELECTRONICS, USA, INC. et al

Filing 68

ORDER re 63 Notice (Other), 66 Response, and 67 Notice (Other) - The parties' requests to amend the December 27, 2011 Order are DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann, Jr., on 1/23/2012.(NRN)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
EVANSVILLE DIVISION
CITIZENS INSURANCE COMPANY OF
THE MIDWEST, an Indiana Corporation, as
Subrogee of William Magee,
Plaintiff,
v.
LG ELECTRONICS, USA, INC., a New Jersey
Corporation, and SEARS ROEBUCK &
COMPANY, a New York Corporation,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

3:11-cv-40-RLY-WGH

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER
ON VARIOUS FILINGS
This matter is before the Honorable William G. Hussmann, Jr., United
States Magistrate Judge, on three filings, specifically:
(1)

Plaintiff’s Corrections and Additions to the December 27, 2011
Order (Docket Entry 62), filed January 4, 2012 – Docket No.
63;

(2)

Defendants’ Corrections and Additions to the Court’s
December 27, 2011 Order (Docket Entry 62) and Objections to
Plaintiff’s Proposed Corrections and Additions Filed on
January 4, 2012, filed January 12, 2012 – Docket No. 66; and

(3)

Plaintiff’s Objections to Defendants’ Proposed Corrections and
Additions to the December 27, 2011 Order (Docket Entry 62),
filed January 16, 2012 – Docket No. 67.

The Magistrate Judge, being duly advised, now declines to correct or make
additions to the Court’s December 27, 2011 Order.

The December 27, 2011 Order arose out of a status conference in this
case. There was no specific motion to compel pending before the court at that
time. The Magistrate Judge did allow certain additional discovery devices to be
served and issued certain orders which were intended to expedite certain limited
portions of discovery in this case prior to the settlement conference which is
currently set for February 1, 2011. It was the intention of the Magistrate Judge
that certain critical information be assembled prior to the settlement conference
which would allow full and frank settlement discussions to occur on that date.
It was the Magistrate Judge’s intention that in the event this matter could not be
settled at the settlement conference, a review of the status of discovery would be
made at that time and a final order would issue more specifically addressing the
scope of discovery necessary for the completion of the litigation. Until that
settlement conference has occurred, there is no reason to amend the prior order.
Therefore, the parties’ requests to amend the December 27, 2011 Order are
DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
__________________________
William G. Hussmann, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
Southern District of Indiana

Dated: January 23, 2012

Electronic copies to:
Michael J. Black
BLACK & MOSS, P.C.
[e-mail]

-2-

Stephen M. Brandenburg
JOHNSON & BELL, LTD.
[e-mail]
Cecilio L. Franco IV
JOHNSON & BELL, LTD.
[e-mail]
Edward W. Hearn
JOHNSON & BELL
[e-mail]
Mickey J. Lee
STEWART & IRWIN P.C.
[e-mail]
Mary F. Schmid
STEWART & IRWIN
[e-mail]

-3-