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)
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?