Ford v. City of Detroit et al

Filing 29

ORDER DENYING Pending Motions without Prejudice Pending Settlement Conference. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION   EMANUEL FORD, Plaintiff, Case No. 17-12933 Hon. Terrence G. Berg v. CITY OF DETROIT, CITY OF DETROIT POLICE DEPARTMENT, JOHN SVEC, and JOHN DOE, Defendants. ORDER DENYING PENDING MOTIONS WITHOUT PREJUDICE PENDING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE On August 8, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c). ECF No. 13. On September 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed both a Response to Defendants’ Motion, ECF No. 18, and a Motion to Amend the Complaint, ECF No. 20. Both Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend the Complaint are fully briefed but remain pending. During a telephone conference on October 31, 2018, parties indicated that they would be open to referral to Magistrate Judge Whalen, who is assigned to this case, for a settlement conference. 1   The Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Whalen on December 4, 2018. ECF No. 27. The parties are scheduled to appear before Judge Whalen for a settlement conference on February 28, 2019. ECF No. 28. In light of this schedule, the Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 13) and Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend the Complaint (ECF No. 19). The parties are given leave to re-file these motions, should they wish to do so, if settlement negotiations are unsuccessful. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 17, 2018 s/Terrence G. Berg TERRENCE G. BERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Certificate of Service I hereby certify that this Order was electronically filed, and the parties and/or counsel of record were served on December 17, 2018. s/A. Chubb Case Manager   2  

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?