Phelps-Roper v. Heineman et al
Filing
277
ORDER. Counsel appeared for the final pretrial conference as set out in the order. The proposed pretrial documents were reviewed. The proposed order on final pretrial conference is accepted, noting it will be amended; Any motion addressing Controv erted and Unresolved Issues must be filed on or before 3/6/2015; any replies to such motions will be filed on or before 3/11/2015. A new trial exhibit list, with objections noted, will be submitted on or before 3/6/2015. Ordered by Magistrate Judge F.A. Gossett. (ARL, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
SHIRLEY L. PHELPS-ROPER,
Plaintiff,
vs.
PETE RICKETTS, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 4:09CV3268
ORDER
This case came before the court for the final pretrial conference. The following were
present: The plaintiff and her counsel, Margie J. Phelps; defendant Pete Ricketts and
defendant Attorney General of Nebraska were represented by James D. Smith, Stephanie A.
Caldwell, Ryan S. Post, Jessica M. Forch, David A. Lopez, Bijan Koohmaraie, and Blake
Johnson; defendant Don Kleine as Douglas County Attorney was represented by Sandra K.
Connolly; and defendant City of Omaha, Nebraska was represented by Thomas O. Mumgaard
and Ryan J. Wiesen.
The proposed pretrial documents were reviewed, and the Court makes the following
rulings:
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The court accepts the proposed order on final pretrial conference, noting that it will
be amended.
2. Any party may file a motion addressing Controverted and Unresolved Issues
(Section C of the final pretrial order), on or before March 6, 2015. Any replies to said motions
will be filed on or before March 11, 2015.
3. The parties will submit a new trial exhibit list, with objections noted, on or
before March 6, 2015.
Dated this 27th day of February, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/ F.A. Gossett, III
United States Magistrate Judge
-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?