Baker, et al v. Sanderson Farms, et al

Filing 112

ORDER clarifying Order filed 05-04-06, as follows: (1) No attorneys may be present at IME examinations of Plaintiffs; (2) Defendant's overall expert witness deadline is 05-22-06; and (3) Defendant's expert designation deadline of Dr. Webb is 06-16-06. Signed by Judge William H. Barbour Jr. on 05-05-06. (Turner, Tom)

Baker, et al v. Sanderson Farms, et al

Doc. 112

Case 3:04-cv-00840-WHB-LRA

Document 112

Filed 05/05/2006

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION

GARY KEITH THOMPSON, ET AL. VS. SANDERSON FARMS, INC. and DARNELL AMOS, ET AL. VS. SANDERSON FARMS and ARTHUR BAKER, ET AL. VS. SANDERSON FARMS

PLAINTIFFS CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:04CV837-WHB-JCS DEFENDANT

PLAINTIFFS CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:04CV839-WHB-JCS DEFENDANT

PLAINTIFFS CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:04CV840-WHB-JCS DEFENDANT

ORDER The Court is in receipt of e-mails from counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendant in the above three causes of action. Through the e-mails, both counsel seek clarification of an

identical Order entered in each of the three cases on May 4, 2006 (hereinafter "May 4 Order").1 The Court construes these e-mail

communications as ora tenus Motions for Clarification. Both counsel seek clarification as to whether counsel will be allowed to be present during the IMEs of eighteen Plaintiffs by Dr.

The Court notes that both counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendant copied one another with their respective e-mail communications with the Court. Therefore, the e-mails do not represent improper ex parte communications.

1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:04-cv-00840-WHB-LRA

Document 112

Filed 05/05/2006

Page 2 of 2

Mark Webb, a psychiatrist, and whether audio and/or video recording devices may be used during the IMEs. The Court finds that such

would not be appropriate, especially since the IMEs will involve psychiatric and/or psychological testing. The presence of counsel

or the presence of recording devices could affect the integrity of this type of testing. It is THEREFORE ORDERED that counsel for

neither Plaintiffs nor Defendant may be present in the immediate examination room where the IMEs are performed, and that recording devices may not be used during the IMEs. However, counsel may be

present at the facility where the IMEs are conducted, so long as they are not in the examination room itself. Counsel for Plaintiffs also seeks clarification of Defendant's deadline for designation of experts. The May 4 Order extended that deadline from May 22, 2006, to June 16, 2006. AMENDS that ruling to state that all of The Court HEREBY expert

Defendant's

designations, other than the expert designation of Dr. Mark Webb, must be filed no later than May 22, 2006. The expert designation

of Dr. Webb, if he is designated as an expert, must be filed no later than June 16, 2006. SO ORDERED this the 5th day of May, 2006.

s/ William H. Barbour, Jr. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE tct

2