Masso v. City of Manchester et al

Filing 30

ORDER approving 28 Discovery Plan. Length of Trial 3-4 days. Case Track: Standard. Affirmative defenses stricken as outlined. City and School District to amend answers as outlined. So Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph N. Laplante. Summary Judgment Motions due by 8/6/2012. Dispositive Motion Filing Deadline 3/1/2012. Mediation Follow Up on 9/17/2012.(dae)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Katherine Ann Masso
v.

Civil No. 11-cv-00370-JL

City of Manchester, et al.

ORDER AFTER PRELIMINARY
PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in chambers on
December 5, 2011.
The plaintiff confirmed that the only claims against
defendant Cote are contained in Count III, the retaliation claim.
The other counts do not assert claims against Cote.
The Discovery Plan (document no. 28) is approved as
submitted, with the following changes:
• Close of discovery - June 1, 2012
• Summary judgment deadline - 120 days before final
pretrial conference
• Jury trial - December, 2012
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:

Manchester Public

Television’s Fifth (unclean hands) and Nineteeth (statute of
limitations).
The City and School District will amend ¶¶ 8, 22, 23, 45(d)
and 48 of their Answers to clearly indicate its position with
respect to the corresponding complaint allegations.
Summary Judgment.

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
2

procedure set forth above, any such motion to compel should
expressly request, in the title of the motion, a referral to the
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: December 5, 2011
cc:

Leslie C. Nixon, Esq.
Robert J. Meagher, Esq.
Allison C. Ayer, Esq.
John C. Kissinger, Esq.

3