Horseman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Filing 23

AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER that the parties' Joint Motion to Amend Progression Order. (Filing No. 21 .) The motion is granted. The trial and pretrial conference will not be set at this time. The status conference presently scheduled for January 21, 2021 is canceled. A status conference to discuss case progression, the parties' interest in settlement, and the trial and pretrial conference settings will be held by telephone with the undersigned magistrate judge on March 11, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. (Filing No. 9 .) Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LAC)

Download PDF
8:20-cv-00146-JFB-SMB Doc # 23 Filed: 11/20/20 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID # 120 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA LEONARD HORSEMAN, Plaintiff, 8:20CV146 vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER Defendant. THIS MATTER is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Amend Progression Order. (Filing No. 21.) The motion is granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the provisions of the Court’s previous final progression order remain in effect, and in addition to those provision, progression shall be amended as follows: 1) The trial and pretrial conference will not be set at this time. The status conference presently scheduled for January 21, 2021 is canceled. A status conference to discuss case progression, the parties’ interest in settlement, and the trial and pretrial conference settings will be held by telephone with the undersigned magistrate judge on March 11, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. (Filing No. 9.) 2) The deadline for completing written discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36 and 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is October 2, 2020. Motions to compel written discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36 and 45 must be filed by October 16, 2020. Note: A motion to compel, to quash, or for a disputed protective order shall not be filed without first contacting the chambers of the undersigned magistrate judge to set a conference for discussing the parties’ dispute. 3) The deadlines for identifying expert witnesses expected to testify at the trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non-retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are: For the plaintiff(s): For the defendant(s): Plaintiff(s) rebuttal: December 1, 2020 January 15, 2021 February 1, 2020 8:20-cv-00146-JFB-SMB Doc # 23 Filed: 11/20/20 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID # 121 4) The deadlines for complete expert disclosures1 for all experts expected to testify at trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non-retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are: For the plaintiff(s): For the defendant(s): Plaintiff(s) rebuttal: 5) December 1, 2020 January 15, 2021 February 1, 2020 The deposition deadline, including but not limited to depositions for oral testimony only under Rule 45, is March 15, 2021. a. The maximum number of depositions that may be taken by the plaintiffs as a group and the defendants as a group is 4. b. Depositions will be limited by Rule 30(d)(1). 6) The deadline for filing motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment is April 15, 2021. 7) The deadline for filing motions to exclude testimony on Daubert and related grounds is April 15, 2021. 8) The parties shall comply with all other stipulations and agreements recited in their Rule 26(f) planning report that are not inconsistent with this order. 9) All requests for changes of deadlines or settings established herein shall be directed to the undersigned magistrate judge. Such requests will not be considered absent a showing of due diligence in the timely progression of this case and the recent development of circumstances, unanticipated prior to the filing of the motion, which require that additional time be allowed. Dated this 21st day of May, 2020. BY THE COURT: s/ Susan M. Bazis United States Magistrate Judge While treating medical and mental health care providers are generally not considered “specially retained experts,” not all their opinions relate to the care and treatment of a patient. Their opinion testimony is limited to what is stated within their treatment documentation. As to each such expert, any opinions which are not stated within that expert’s treatment records and reports must be separately and timely disclosed. 1

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?