Hyer et al v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company

Filing 9

ORDER approving 6 Discovery Plan as outlined. Length of Trial 3 days. Case Track: Standard. Statute of Frauds affirmative defense stricken without prejudice. So Ordered by Judge Joseph N. Laplante. Summary Judgment Motions due by 8/1/2011. Dispositive Motion Filing Deadline 1/18/2011. Mediation Follow Up on 3/15/2011. (dae)

Download PDF
Hyer et al v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company Doc. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Kimberly Ann Hyer, et al. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Company Civil No. 10-cv-00392-JL ORDER AFTER PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE The Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in chambers on November 16, 2010. The parties may jointly request a stay pending the Maine Supreme Court's decision in the plaintiffs' related case. The Discovery Plan (document no. 6) is approved as submitted, with the following changes: DeBennedetto disclosure deadline - December 15, 2010 Close of discovery - June 30, 2011 Close of expert discovery - June 15, 2011 Plaintiff's expert disclosure - April 1, 2011 Defendant's expert disclosure - May 15, 2011 Supplementation - June 15, 2011 Summary judgment deadline - August 1, 2011 Jury trial - December 2011 Dockets.Justia.com Based on the discussions between the court and counsel at the conference, the following are stricken without prejudice to being reinstated on request if warranted by the evidence: the following affirmative defenses: Summary Judgment. Statute of Frauds. The parties and counsel are advised that compliance with Rule 56(e) and Local Rule 7.2(b), regarding evidentiary support for factual assertions, and specification and delineation of material issues of disputed fact, will be required. Discovery disputes. Discovery disputes will be handled by the undersigned judge, as opposed to the Magistrate Judge, in the normal course. No motion to compel is necessary. The party or counsel seeking discovery-related relief should confer with adverse counsel to choose mutually available dates, and then contact the Deputy Clerk to schedule a conference call with the court. The court will inform counsel and parties what written materials, if any, should be submitted in advance of the conference call. Customary motions to compel discovery, while disfavored by the undersigned judge, are nonetheless permissible. If counsel prefer traditional discovery litigation to the conference call procedure set forth above, any such motion to compel should expressly request, in the title of the motion, a referral to the 2 United States Magistrate Judge. normally be granted. Such referral requests will If the Magistrate Judge is recused, alternate arrangements will be made. SO ORDERED. ____________________________ Joseph N. Laplante United States District Judge Dated: cc: November 16, 2010 William G. Scott, Esq. Heather Dunion Neville, Esq. Mark F. Weaver, Esq. 3

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?