American Demolition & Nuclear Decommissioning, Inc. v. Southeast Abatement Services, Inc.

Filing 35

DECISION AND ORDER RE SCHEDULING. Signed by Hon. Jeremiah J. McCarthy on 11/23/16. (DAZ)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
__________________________________________
AMERICAN DEMOLITION &
NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING,
INC., a/k/a AMERICAN DND, INC.,

DECISION AND ORDER
15-CV-00461-EAW-JJM

Plaintiff,
v.
SOUTHEAST ABATEMENT SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant.
__________________________________________
Familiarity with the procedural history of this action is presumed. On October 20,
2015 I held a scheduling conference with counsel [23],1 during which they agreed on the
following deadlines for completion of pretrial proceedings: completion of fact discovery by
May 1, 2016, completion of expert discovery by August 30, 2016, and filing of pretrial
dispositive motions by October 20, 2016. I confirmed those deadlines in a Case Management
Order (“CMO”) issued the following day [24]. The CMO cautioned that “[n]o extension of the
above deadlines will be granted except upon written application, filed prior to the deadline,
showing good cause for the extension. The parties are reminded that ‘a finding of good cause
depends on the diligence of the moving party’. Parker v. Columbia Pictures Industries, 204 F.3d
326, 340 (2d Cir. 2000)”.
At a status conference yesterday [34], the parties orally requested an extension of
the deadline to complete pretrial discovery. Since they have failed to show good cause for the
extension, that request is denied. While the parties are free to conduct whatever discovery they
may agree upon, they may not seek the court’s assistance in doing so - nor will the court
1

Bracketed references are to CM/ECF docket entries.

entertain pretrial dispositive motions, since that deadline has likewise expired. See Mba/Creative
Connections, Inc. v. Binder, 1985 WL 3154, *2 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (“[n]othing in this Order should
be read as precluding the parties from cooperating in whatever voluntary forms of pre-trial
discovery they may jointly undertake. No further discovery or nondiscovery motions will be
entertained, and the trial of the matter will not be postponed to accommodate such voluntary
discovery efforts”).
The parties shall contact Judge Wolford’s chambers (or my chambers in the event
that they consent to a trial before me) by January 17, 2017 to schedule a trial date. If the parties
believe that my involvement would aid in settling the case, they may contact my chambers.
Finally, a word of caution. The parties submit different versions of the contract at
issue, and accuse each other of fabrication and fraud. See Amended Complaint [13], ¶¶9, 16, 19;
Answer and Counterclaim [16], ¶¶3, 9, 15, 33-36, 58, 75, 77. “Accusations of fraud are serious
ones to make and they should not be made lightly.” United States v. Allstate Insurance Co.,
2014 WL 10748104, *5 (W.D.N.Y. 2014) (McCarthy, M.J.), adopted, 2016 WL 463732
(W.D.N.Y. 2016) (Skretny, J.). They will not be treated lightly by this court. If it is determined
that someone has knowingly submitted a fabricated document in connection with this litigation,
they will be dealt with accordingly. See Ceglia v. Zuckerberg, 2013 WL 1208558 (W.D.N.Y.
2013) (Foschio, M.J.), adopted, 2014 WL 1224574 (W.D.N.Y. 2014) (Arcara, J.), aff’d, 600 F.
App’x 34 (2d Cir. 2015).
Dated: November 23, 2016

/s/ Jeremiah J. McCarthy
JEREMIAH J. MCCARTHY
United States Magistrate Judge

-2-