Roe et al v. St. Louis University

Filing 63

ORDER re 59 ORDERED that Plaintiff's Attorneys' Renewed and Amended Motion toWithdraw as Counsel (Doc. No. 59) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Joan Roe is henceforth to be treated as a pro se litigant in this matter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted until Tuesday, September 8, 2009, within which to review any documents recovered from the hard drives of Plaintiff's laptops for responsiveness and privilege, and to supplement Plaintiff's discover y responses as necessary. FURTHER ORDERED that the Case Management Order in this matter (Doc. No. 22) is modified (see order for complete list of dates)FURTHER ORDERED that all other deadlines in this Court's January22, 2009, Case Management Order remain in place.( Discovery Completion due by 11/23/2009., Dispositive Motions due by 12/7/2009.). Signed by Honorable Jean C. Hamilton on 8/18/09. (CEL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JOAN ROE, Plaintiff(s), vs. SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY, et al., Defendant(s). ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER Pursuant to a telephone conference held Tuesday, August 18, 2009, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Attorneys' Renewed and Amended Motion to Withdraw as Counsel (Doc. No. 59) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Joan Roe is henceforth to be treated as a pro se litigant in this matter.1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted until Tuesday, September 8, 2009, wit hin which to review any documents recovered from the hard drives of Plaintiff's laptops for responsiveness and privilege, and to supplement Plaintiff's discovery responses as necessary. If any documents are withheld on the basis of privilege, Plaintiff shall produce a privilege log that complies with this Court's rules. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Case Management Order in this matter (Doc. No. 22) is modified as follows: 1. Plaintiff shall disclose all expert witnesses and shall provide the reports required by Rule 26(a)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., no later than September 17, 2009,

Case No. 4:08CV1474 JCH

Should Plaintiff secure alternate representation in this matter, then new counsel should enter an appearance on her behalf immediately.

1

and shall make expert witnesses available for depositions, and have depositions completed, no later than October 1, 2009. Plaintiff shall disclose rebuttal experts and shall provide the reports required by Rule 26(a)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., no later than November 9, 2009, and shall make rebuttal experts available for depositions, and have depositions completed, no later than November 23, 2009. 2. Defendants shall disclose all expert witnesses and shall provide the reports required by Rule 26(a)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., no later than October 19, 2009, and shall make expert witnesses available for depositions, and have depositions completed, no later than November 2, 2009. The parties shall complete all discovery in this case no later than November 23, 2009. Any motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, motions for judgment on the pleadings or, if applicable, motions to exclude testimony pursuant to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) or Kuhmo Tire Co. Ltd v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), must be filed no later than December 7, 2009. Any response shall be filed no later t han January 7, 2010. Any reply shall be filed no later than January 19, 2010. In the event dispositive motions are filed prior to the above specified date, the opposing party shall file a response thirty days after the filing of the dispositive motion. A reply may be filed ten (10) days after the filing of the response. Briefing of such motions shall be governed by E.D.Mo. L.R. 4.01.

3. 4.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other deadlines in this Court's January 22, 2009, Case Management Order remain in place.

Dated this 18th day of August, 2009.

/s/ Jean C. Hamilton UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-