Jacobs et al v. Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company

Filing 13

ORDER Denying 11 Proposed Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order. Discovery due by 10/13/2015. Motions due by 11/12/2015. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 12/11/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 6/16/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

***

6
7
8
9
10

JOSHUA JACOBS, et al.

Case No. 2:15-cv-00647-RFB-PAL
Plaintiffs,

ORDER

v.
METROPOLITAN
PROPERTY
AND
CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.

11
12

The court conducted a scheduling conference on June 16, 2015 regarding the parties’

13

Proposed Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (Dkt. #11). Benjamin Carman appeared on

14

behalf of the Defendants, and Anne Padgett appeared on behalf of the Defendant. The court

15

canvassed counsel about the discovery needed to prepare this case for trial and the request for

16

270 days to complete discovery.

17

The complaint in this case was filed in state court and removed April 8, 2015. This is a

18

breach of contract and bad faith claim arising out of a burglary at the Plaintiffs’ home on August

19

5, 2014 while they were out of the country in Belize. Plaintiffs’ adult son and fiancé were

20

staying at the home and reported the burglary. Approximately $40,000 in jewelry was taken.

21

Defendant issued a homeowner’s policy which provided $231,280 in personal property coverage

22

with an endorsement providing approximately $14,000 in coverage for a tennis bracelet reported

23

stolen. Defendant investigated and “denied the bulwark of the claim”. Defendant asserts this

24

court has diversity jurisdiction because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 because of

25

the bad faith claim.

26

Plaintiffs intend to obtain the claim file and depose the individuals involved in denying

27

the claim. Defendant has obtained the claims file from pre litigation counsel and the company

28

and is in the process of reviewing the files. Defendant will take the depositions of the Plaintiffs,
1

1

their son and his fiancé. This is not a complex case. The parties have not established good cause

2

for more time than deemed presumptively reasonable to conduct discovery. The court will

3

therefore deny the parties’ proposed discovery plan and enter a standard 180-day plan measured

4

from the date of the Defendant’s Answer (Dkt. #7) filed April 15, 2015.

5

IT IS ORDERED that:

6

1. The parties’ Proposed Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (Dkt. #11) is DENIED.

7

2. The following discovery plan and scheduling order dates shall apply:

8

a. Last date to complete discovery: October 13, 2015.

9

b. Last date to amend pleadings and add parties: July 14, 2015.

10

c. Last date to file interim status report: August 13, 2015.

11

d. Last date to disclose experts pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2): September 12,

12

2015.

13

e. Last date to disclose rebuttal experts: September 14, 2015.

14

f. Last date to file dispositive motions: November 12, 2015.

15

g. Last date to file joint pretrial order: December 11, 2015. In the event dispositive

16

motions are filed, the date for filing the joint pretrial order shall be suspended until 30

17

days after a decision of the dispositive motions.

18
19

3. The disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3), and any objections thereto, shall
be included in the pretrial order.

20

4. Applications to extend any dates set by this discovery plan and scheduling order shall,

21

in addition to satisfying the requirements of LR 6-1, be supported by a showing of

22

good cause for the extension. All motions or stipulations to extend discovery shall be

23

received no later than 4:00 p.m., September 22, 2015, and shall fully comply with

24

the requirements of LR 26-4.

25

DATED this 16th day of June, 2015.

26
27
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
2