WHITE et al v. SPURWINK SERVICES INCORPORATED
ORDER & REPORT OF CONFERENCE By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (lrc)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
ISABELLA W. WHITE, et al.
) Docket no. 2:12-cv-00117-GZS
ORDER & REPORT OF CONFERENCE
In accordance with the Court’s prior Order (ECF No. 32), the Court held a conference of
counsel on December 10, 2012. Attorneys Donald Fontaine and Howard Reben appeared for
Plaintiffs. Attorney Graydon Stevens appeared for Defendant. Following the conference, the
Court hereby ORDERS that the following procedure be followed in connection with the
discussed motion practice:
On or before January 23, 2013, 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 list. The Stipulated Record may include any exhibits and depositions (including
any exhibits to the depositions) that all sides agree will be referenced in the statements of
material fact. With respect to depositions, 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. 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 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 purposes of the to-be-filed
summary judgment motions. 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 January 23, 2013.
On or before January 28, 2013, Defendant shall file its motion for summary judgment.
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment shall not exceed thirty (30) pages, unless Defendant
chooses to omit briefing on the uncompensated time issue, in which case Defendant’s motion
shall not exceed twenty (20) pages. See Local Rule 7(e).
On or before February 19, 2013, Plaintiffs shall file their response to Defendant’s
motion for summary judgment. At the conference, Plaintiffs indicated a desire to file a brief
motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs also indicated that they may desire to file a crossmotion for summary judgment on the issue of uncompensated time. Accordingly, to the extent
that Plaintiffs desire to file for summary judgment on any issue, those motions shall likewise be
filed by February 19, 2013. Plaintiffs’ brief motion for summary judgment, cross-motion for
summary judgment and response to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment shall not exceed
thirty (30) pages. See id.
On or before March 12, 2013, Defendant shall file its responses to Plaintiffs’ brief
motion for summary judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment, if one is filed. By this
date, Defendant shall also file its reply in support of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
Defendant’s responses and reply shall not exceed twenty (20) pages.
On or before April 2, 2013, Plaintiffs shall file their replies in support of their brief
motion for summary judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs’ replies shall
not exceed ten (10) pages.
The Court also expects the parties’ summary judgment filings will comply with all
aspects of Local Rule 56. Each side may file a statement of material fact. 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.
With respect to the prior Scheduling Order deadlines (ECF Nos. 6, 10, 26), it appears that
the only deadline that may remain after the anticipated motions for summary judgment is the
ready for trial deadline. This deadline shall remain stayed until the Court issues its ruling on the
motions for summary judgment. To the extent that any issues remain for trial at that time, the
Court anticipates that this case would be placed on the next available trial list following the
Court’s summary judgment decisions.
/s/ George Z. Singal
United States District Judge
Dated this 11th day of December, 2012.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?