Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's and those companies severally subscribing to Boeing Policy Number MARCW150053 and related policies governing the cargo et al v. Southern Pride Trucking, Inc. et al
Filing
280
ORDER denying 279 Motion for oral argument. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (Zwart, Cheryl)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT
LLOYD'S AND THOSE COMPANIES
SEVERALLY SUBSCRIBING TO
BOEING POLICY NUMBER
MARCW150053 AND RELATED
POLICIES GOVERNING THE CARGO,
8:16CV116
ORDER
Plaintiff,
vs.
SOUTHERN PRIDE TRUCKING, INC.,
THUNDER ROLLS EXPRESS, INC.,
BAUER BUILT INC., and ROAD STAR
CARRIER, INC.,
Defendants.
On March 20, 2018, Judge Gerrard directed counsel to “make every effort
to keep their disagreements with one another to a minimum,” and “make every
effort to keep their disagreements with one another off the Court's docket.” (Filing
No. 240, at CM/ECF p. 4). Less than two months later, eight new case
progression and discovery motions, with over 1000 pages of initial briefing 1 and
evidence, are now pending before the undersigned magistrate judge.
Plaintiff requests a projected three-hour, in-person oral argument on these
motions, (Filing No. 279), claiming “the Court’s firm guidance is necessary for an
orderly resolution of the motions, and an orderly resolution of the remainder of
this action.” I am not convinced. I have already presided over eight telephone
conferences in this case, most of which were highly contentious, and those
1
Responses and replies have not yet been filed.
efforts have evoked no progress in garnering the attorneys’ cooperation toward
compromise, allaying motion practice, and keeping this case on track.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for oral argument, (Filing No. 279), is
denied.
May 21, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Cheryl R. Zwart
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?