Griego et al v. Douglas et al

Filing 122

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Karen B. Molzen granting 105 Motion to Continue. The trial set for July 23, 2018 is vacated. The Pretrial Order deadlines, other than jury instructions and responses to motions in limine, are also vacated. The parties shall appear telephonically before the Court on Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. (cm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

MICHAEL GRIEGO, Personal Representative of
The Wrongful Death Estate of
ALEC J. JARAMILLO, Deceased,
ANDREW JARAMILLO and TERESA ROMO,
Plaintiffs,
v.

CIV 17-0244 KBM/JHR

LABERTA M. DOUGLAS, as Personal
Representative of the Estate of Russell E.
Douglas and STATE FARM MUTUAL
AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CONTINUE
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Opposed Motion to Vacate
July 23, 2018 Trial Setting (Doc. 105), filed July 5, 2018. Having reviewed the parties’
submissions and all pertinent authority, the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ Motion.
This case arises from a 2015 vehicle collision between Russell Douglas and Alec
Jaramillo. At his deposition on January 27, 2017, Russell Douglas testified that he had
undergone a cataract surgery, but he did not specify the date of that procedure. Doc.
109-1. At a more recent deposition, his wife testified a doctor had performed the
cataract surgery about two months after the collision at issue here. Doc. 105 at 3.
On September 20, 2017, Plaintiffs sent discovery requests to Defendants and
specifically requested an executed medical authorization to obtain Mr. Douglas’ medical
and vision records. Doc. 49; see also Doc. 105 at 2. In response to Defendants’

objections to that and other discovery requests, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Compel on
December 22, 2017. Doc. 56. On May 24, 2018, Judge Ritter ordered that Defendants
“execute a medical release for Mr. Douglas limited to ‘any medical conditions that could
interfere with driving’ and the quality of Mr. Douglas’ vision at the time of the collision
. . . limited to the year preceding the collision at issue.” Doc. 85 at 16 (“the Order”). He
further directed Defendants to produce the release within 30 days of entry of the Order.
Doc. 85 at 17. Defendants do not dispute that they produced the authorization on June
25, 2018 at 4:58 p.m. – 32 days after entry of that Order. Doc. 105 at 2.
Plaintiffs now seek to continue the trial, currently set for July 23, 2018, in order to
seek an expansion of Judge Ritter’s order to “allow collection of Mr. Douglas’ preoperative cataract surgery records.” Doc. 105 at 3. Defendants argue that Plaintiffs’
request is untimely because they knew in January 2017 about the cataract surgery, but
did not seek Court intervention in obtaining the medical records until eleven months
later. While Plaintiffs may have deferred their request for medical records, that request
was made well within the deadline set forth in the Court’s Scheduling Order. See
Doc. 73 (discovery deadline April 30, 2018); Doc. 54 (discovery motions deadline
March 7, 2018). Moreover, Defendants delayed production of the medical release even
beyond the last possible moment for complying with Judge Ritter’s Order. Plaintiffs
therefore were given very little time to obtain, review, and request supplementation to
these potentially relevant medical records prior to trial. Given these circumstances, but
with great reluctance, the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ request to vacate the July 23, 2018
trial setting.

2

However, the Court expects the parties to be fully ready for trial and sees no
reason to delay that preparation. Accordingly, the Court will not vacate certain Pretrial
Orders deadlines. The parties are to still submit their proposed jury instructions by today
– July 11, 2018 – with written objections due by July 16, 2018. Additionally, the parties
shall still respond to Motions in Limine by this Friday, July 13, 2018. All other pending
Pretrial Order deadlines are vacated.
Finally, the parties shall appear telephonically before the Court on Monday, July
23, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. to discuss a date for resetting the trial and to set a date for oral
arguments on the pending Motions in Limine. Counsel shall call the Court’s meet-me
conference line at [phone] to be joined to the proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Presiding by Consent

3