MORIN v. HANNAFORD BROS CO LLC

Filing 25

ORDER IN LIEU OF PRE-FILING CONFERENCE- Joint Stipulated Record due by 12/11/2017, Motion for Summary Judgment due by 12/15/2017, response due by 1/5/2018, reply due by 1/19/2018 By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (lrc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
JAI MORIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
HANNAFORD BROS. CO., LLC,

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
) Docket no. 1:17-cv-50-GZS
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER IN LIEU OF PRE-FILING CONFERENCE
The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Notice Of Intent To File Motion For Summary
Judgment And Need For Pre-Filing Conference (ECF No. 21) and the Preconference Memoranda
received from both sides (ECF Nos. 23 & 24). Having reviewed these filings, the Court concludes
that no conference is necessary and hereby ORDERS that the following procedure be followed in
connection with the to-be-filed motion:
On or before December 11, 2017, the parties shall file a joint stipulated record using the
“Stipulated Record” event in CM/ECF. The first page of the Stipulated Record shall consist of a
list describing each exhibit submitted. Each exhibit shall then be clearly labeled and separately
attached to this filing. The Stipulated Record may include any exhibits and depositions1 (including
any exhibits to the depositions) that both sides agree will be referenced in the statements of material
fact. The inclusion of any exhibit in the Stipulated Record does not prevent any party from later
objecting to the admissibility of the document. Likewise, the submission of a joint record does

1

To the extent any depositions are filed, counsel shall endeavor to ensure that any deposition excerpt is complete
and includes all relevant pages. In the absence of an agreement on what constitutes a complete deposition excerpt,
counsel shall include the complete deposition in the joint record.

not prevent either side from submitting additional documents with their respective statements of
material fact.
The Court encourages the parties to file stipulations of fact that could serve to further
streamline the parties’ statements of material fact. The Court reminds the parties that they are free
to indicate that any such stipulations are admissions solely for the purposes of the to-be-filed
summary judgment motion. See D. Me. Local Rule 56(g). Any stipulations will be considered by
the Court in ruling on the motion and need not be reiterated or referenced in the statements of
material fact. The parties are free to submit any stipulations on or before December 15, 2017.
On or before December 15, 2017, Defendant shall file its outlined motion for summary
judgment. The motion for summary judgment shall not exceed thirty (30) pages.
On or before January 5, 2018, Plaintiff shall file its opposition to the pending motion for
summary judgment. This response shall not exceed thirty (30) pages.
On or before January 19, 2018, Defendant shall file its reply in support of Defendant’s
motion for summary judgment, which shall not exceed ten (10) pages.
The Court also expects the parties’ summary judgment filings will comply with all aspects
of Local Rule 56. Absent prior court approval, Defendant’s statement of material facts shall not
exceed one hundred (100) paragraphs. Any additional statement of material facts by Defendant
shall not exceed two hundred (200) paragraphs. The parties are reminded that Local Rule 56(f)
requires specific record citations for all facts submitted in a statement of material facts. Absent a
specific citation, the Court has no duty to consider any part of the record submitted. To the extent
any party will rely on a page of the joint record for a specific citation, the Court encourages the
parties to use the “PageID #” generated by CM/ECF, particularly if the alternative pin citation may
not be readily apparent to the Court.

2

With respect to the prior Scheduling Order deadlines (ECF Nos. 12, 14, 18 & 20), it appears
that the only deadlines that may remain after the anticipated motion for summary judgment is the
ready for trial deadline and any trial-related motions deadlines. These deadlines shall remain
stayed until the Court issues its ruling on the motion for summary judgment. To the extent that
issues remain for trial after the motion for summary judgment is decided, the Court anticipates that
this case will be placed on the next available trial list following the Court’s summary judgment
decision and that pre-trial motions shall, to the extent practicable, be filed prior to any final pretrial
conference.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ George Z. Singal
United States District Judge
Dated this 20th day of November, 2017.

3