Erbert v. Konecranes Standard Lifting Corp. et al

Filing 98

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER after conferring with the parties, The courts previous progression order, (Filing No. 46 ), is set aside, and all deadlines and hearings therein are cancelled. At this time, the parties discovery efforts will be focused on preparing for additional mediation. The discovery needed for full participation in mediation shall be completed by March 31, 2013. A telephonic conference with the undersigned magistrate judge will be held on May 30, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the status of the parties settlement discussions. Counsel for plaintiff shall place the call. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (MKR)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA HEATH ERBERT, TOPP'S MECHANICAL, INC., a domestic corporation; 4:10CV3196 Plaintiffs, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER vs. KONECRANES STANDARD LIFTING CORP., a foreign corporation; MORRIS MATERIAL HANDLING, INC., a foreign corporation; KONECRANES, INC., a foreign corporation; BLACK AND VEATCH CONSTRUCTION, INC., a foreign corporation; CASEY INDUSTRIAL, INC., a foreign corporation; and TOPP'S MECHANICAL, INC., a domestic corporation; Defendants. After conferring with the parties, IT IS ORDERED: 1) The court’s previous progression order, (Filing No. 46), is set aside, and all deadlines and hearings therein are cancelled. 2) At this time, the parties’ discovery efforts will be focused on preparing for additional mediation. The discovery needed for full participation in mediation shall be completed by March 31, 2013. 3) A telephonic conference with the undersigned magistrate judge will be held on May 30, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the status of the parties’ settlement discussions. Counsel for plaintiff shall place the call. October 23, 2012. BY THE COURT: s/ Cheryl R. Zwart United States Magistrate Judge

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?