Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al
ORDER granting 287 Motion to Compel Signed by Jeremiah C. Lynch on 5/23/2012. (TXB, ) Modified on 5/24/2012 to reflect copy mailed to Spreadbury (APP, ).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY,
BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,
CITY OF HAMILTON,
LEE ENTERPRISES, INC., and
BOONE KARLBERG, P.C.,
DR. ROBERT BROPHY, TRISTA
SMITH, NANSU RODDY,
JERRY STEELE, STEVE SNAVELY,
RYAN OSTER, KENNETH S. BELL,
and JENNIFER LINT
Defendants City of Hamilton and Bitterroot Public Library move the Court
to compel Plaintiff Michael Spreadbury to participate in preparing the final pretrial
order in accordance with Local Rule 16.4 and the scheduling order entered in this
matter on November 30, 2011 (Dkt. 182). In view of the proximity of the jury trial
set for June 18, 2012, and in the interest of efficiency, the Court addresses the
Defendants’ motion without the benefit of a response from Mr. Spreadbury.
Local Rule 16.4 requires all parties to cooperatively participate in the
preparation of a final pretrial order. And the failure to cooperatively participate
will result in an appropriate sanction – which may be dispositive in nature – being
entered against any recalcitrant party that inhibits the preparation of the final
Under the circumstances presented, the Court deems it appropriate not to
require the parties to convene a conference in relation to the preparation of the
final pretrial order. The parties shall accomplish preparation of the final pretrial
order in accordance with the following procedure and schedule:
On May 25, 2012, Plaintiff Spreadbury shall serve upon counsel for
the Defendants a written statement setting forth, in accordance with Local Rule
16.4, the following:1
Nature of Action. A plain, concise statement of Spreadbury’s
remaining claims against the Defendants; ...
(4) Agreed Facts. Those facts proposed by the Defendants to
which Spreadbury stipulated are not in dispute; ...
(7) The basis and amount of any monetary damages sought by
Spreadbury and the specific nature of any relief; ...
(10) Provide a list of each witness Spreadbury will call at trial,
identifying each by name and city and state of current
residence. And provide a similar list with respect to each
witness Spreadbury may call to testify at the time of trial.
(11) Identify on an exhibit list each document, photograph, or other
The Defendants represent they have provided Mr. Spreadbury their
proposed form of a pretrial order setting forth each of the categories of
information required by Local Rule 16.4.
item that Spreadbury will offer as an exhibit at trial. And a
separate list identifying each document, photograph, or other
item that Spreadbury may offer as an exhibit at the time of trial.
(12) Discovery Documents. A list of specific answers to
interrogatories and responses to requests for admission that
Spreadbury expects to offer at trial;
(13) Deposition Excerpts and Summaries. Reflect on the witness
list referred to above, any deposition excerpts that Spreadbury
intends to offer at trial, except for impeachment or rebuttal and
his objections to the deposition excepts designated by the
(14) Estimate of Trial Time. Set forth the number of Court days
Spreadbury expects will be necessary for the presentation of his
case in chief.2
Upon receipt of Mr. Spreadbury’s written submission, Counsel for the
Defendant shall incorporate that submission into the proposed final pretrial order,
serve on Mr. Spreadbury, and file it with the Court on or before May 31, 2012.
The failure of any party to comply with this Order will result in the
imposition of an appropriate sanction.
DATED this 23rd day of May, 2012
/s/ Jeremiah C. Lynch
Jeremiah C. Lynch
United States Magistrate Judge
The writing shall conform to the sample Form D as set forth in Appendix
C to the Local Rules. Likewise, the witness lists and exhibit lists discussed herein
shall conform to sample Forms E and F as set forth in Appendix C to the Local
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?