Williams v. Association de Prevoyance Interentreprises et al

Filing 85

ORDER re pla's 79 Motion for New Trial and/or Motion to Amend Joint Scheduling Order: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the pending motion is GRANTED and the deadline to file amended pleadings is retroactively extended to November 9, 2012. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown on 12/27/2012. (rll, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
OTHA MICHAEL WILLIAMS

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO. 11-1664

ASSOCIATION DE PRÈVOYANCE
INTERENTREPRISES d/b/a/ PREVINTER,
SIACI SAINT HONORÉ d/b/a/ MOBILITY
BENEFITS & PRIDE INTERNATIONAL, INC.
LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN

SECTION: “G”(2)

ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Otha Michael Williams’s (“Plaintiff”) foregoing Motion for New
Trial and/or Motion to Amend Joint Scheduling Order,1 wherein Plaintiff requests that the Court
amend its scheduling order and grant him leave to file a Second Amended Complaint. In the pending
motion, Plaintiff states that :
By agreement of counsel, [the deadline to file amended pleadings] was extended by
seven days to November 9, 2012. Counsel agreed to the seven day extension of time
to provide Plaintiff with sufficient time to receive and review the Answer and
Affirmative Defenses filed by Defendant, SIACI, prior to amending the complaint...
The Second Amended Complaint was filed timely according to the joint agreement
of counsel to extend the deadline by seven days. Plaintiff, therefore, respectfully
urges this Court to grant a new trial and grant leave for Plaintiff to file the attached
Second Amended Complaint.2
This Court reminds counsel that “[a] schedule may only be modified for good cause and with
the judge’s consent.”3 A district court has broad discretion to refuse to modify its scheduling order.4
The parties may not independently agree to modify this Court’s scheduling order, operate as if the
1

Rec. Doc. 79.

2

Rec. Doc. 79-2 at pp. 1-2.

3

Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4) (emphasis added).

4

Geiserman v. MacDonald, 893 F.2d 787, 792 (5th Cir. 1990).

scheduling order has been so changed, and then merely ask for the Court’s permission later. While
this Court would be within its broad discretion to deny Plaintiff’s requests to modify the scheduling
order and deny him leave to file his Second Amended Complaint, the Court will on this one occasion
modify the scheduling order to allow for the filing of amended pleadings until November 9, 2012
and grant Plaintiff leave to file said complaint. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the pending motion is GRANTED and the deadline to file
amended pleadings is retroactively extended to November 9, 2012.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted leave to file a Second Amended
Complaint.
New Orleans, Louisiana, on this ____ day of December, 2012.
27th

________________________________________
NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE