Lund v. Matthews et al

Filing 55

ORDER the the defendants' Motion for Extension of Time and For Order Compelling Production of Witnesses 47 is granted, in part. The deadlines to serve the opposing party with the statements required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) (2) regarding each expert witness a party expects to call to testify at trial are extended. The defendants shall have until June 30, 2014. Rebuttal expert disclosures may be made not later than July 23, 2014. The parties shall have until July 30, 2014, to complete depositions. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (JSF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

ALEXANDER LUND,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MICHAEL MATTHEWS, M.D.,
SIDNEY MEDICAL ASSOCIATES,
and CHEYENNE COUNTY
HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION, INC.,

8:13CV144
ORDER

Defendants.
This matter comes before the court on the defendants’ Motion for Extension of
Time and For Order Compelling Production of Witnesses (Filing No. 47).

The

defendants filed an index of evidence (Filing No. 48) in support of the motion. The
plaintiff did not respond to the motion.
In the motion, the defendants state they seek an extension of time to disclose
expert witnesses and to take depositions. In addition, the defendants seek an order
compelling the plaintiff to complete his deposition and produce other witnesses for
deposition.

The defendants state the plaintiff failed to participate in scheduling his

deposition and those of his parents despite numerous attempts made by the
defendants. The defendants prefer to complete this fact discovery prior to deposing the
plaintiff’s expert witnesses and disclosing their own expert witnesses. Although counsel
for the defendants states he is unable to schedule a deposition without the court’s
assistance, such statement is simply untrue.

In the correspondence filed with the

motion, the plaintiff’s counsel agreed to work to with the defendants’ counsel to
schedule the depositions. No dates were finalized, however the plaintiff did not refuse
to schedule the depositions. Furthermore, conventions of courtesy suggest the parties
will work together on mutually convenient deposition scheduling, Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 30 does not. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(1). Under the circumstances it
appears unnecessary to compel the witnesses’ appearance because the proposed
deponents have not refused to appear and there has been no notice of such depositions
or subpoenas served. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b), 45. Nevertheless, the defendants

have shown good cause exists for an extension of the expert disclosure and deposition
deadlines. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:
1.

The defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time and For Order Compelling

Production of Witnesses (Filing No. 47) is granted, in part.
2.

The deadlines to serve the opposing party with the statements required by

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) regarding each expert witness a party expects to call to testify
at trial are extended. The defendants shall have until June 30, 2014. Rebuttal expert
disclosures may be made not later than July 23, 2014.
3.

The parties shall have until July 30, 2014, to complete depositions.

Dated this 13th day of May, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Thomas D. Thalken
United States Magistrate Judge

2