Bader Farms, Inc. et al v. Monsanto Company

Filing 165

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 163 Emergency MOTION to Continue March 25, 2019 Expert Deposition Deadline and for Immediate Telephonic Hearing filed by Defendant Monsanto Company. A telephonic hearing was held off the record, and arguments from both sides were heard. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendants motion for continuance (#163) is DENIED.. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 3/21/19. (MRS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
BADER FARMS, INC. and
BILL BADER
Plaintiffs,
v.
MONSANTO CO. and
BASF CORP.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

MDL No. 1:18md2820-SNLJ
Case No. 1:16cv299-SNLJ

MEMORANDUM and ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the joint emergency motion for continuance of the
March 25, 2019 expert deposition deadline and for immediate telephonic hearing filed by
defendants Monsanto Company and BASF Corporation. The Court granted the motion for a
telephonic hearing, held off the record, and heard argument from both plaintiffs and defendants.
Defendants wish to postpone the depositions of the plaintiffs’ experts until the Court has ruled on
plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint. Plaintiffs’ proposed amendment, inter alia, makes
explicit that plaintiffs seek damages for the 2018 crop season. Defendants argue that they have
not received discovery from 2018, and, as a result, they say they are unable to effectively cross
examine plaintiffs’ damages experts on 2018 damage. Defendants want to avoid the need for
multiple depositions.
This is complex case. Multiple depositions of witnesses are likely. The Court made clear
that, to the extent defendants require additional time to depose plaintiffs’ experts, such additional
time will likely be allowed. The interests of justice require that the parties proceed with discovery
at this time. Any inconvenience posed by the possibility of repeated depositions of witnesses will
1

be borne by both parties, and such inconvenience is outweighed by the parties’ and the Court’s
interest in the continued progress of discovery and full development of the record.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendants’ motion for continuance (#163) is
DENIED.

So ordered this 21st day of March, 2019.
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2