MCFADYEN et al v. DUKE UNIVERSITY et al
Filing
419
Transcript of Proceedings held on 05/16/2013, re: Status Conference, before Judge James A. Beaty, Jr., Court Reporter Lori Russell, Telephone number 336-734-2547. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. NOTICE RE: REDACTION OF TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have 5 business days to file a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction and 21 calendar days to file a Redaction Request. If no notice is filed, this transcript will be made electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the court reporter before the 90 day deadline. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 7/14/2014. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 7/24/2014. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 9/19/2014. Associated Cases: 1:07-cv-00953-JAB-JEP, 1:07-cv-00739-JAB-JEP (Russell, Lori)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
DAVID F. EVANS, et al.,
*
*
Plaintiffs, *
*
vs.
*
*
CITY OF DURHAM, NC, et al., *
*
Defendants. *
____________________________*
*
RYAN MCFADYEN, et al.,
*
*
Plaintiffs, *
*
vs.
*
*
DUKE UNIVERSITY, et al.,
*
*
Defendants. *
*****************************
Case No. 1:07CV739
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
May 16, 2014
10 a.m.
Case No.
1:07CV953
TRANSCRIPT OF STATUS CONFERENCE
BEFORE THE HONORABLE JAMES A. BEATY, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiffs:
1:07CV739
CHRISTOPHER N. MANNING, ESQUIRE
CHARLES DAVANT, IV, ESQUIRE
Williams & Connolly, LLP
725 12th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
CHRISTOPHER C. FIALKO, ESQUIRE
Rudolf Widenhouse & Fialko
225 East Worthington Avenue
Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28203
1:07CV953
ROBERT C. EKSTRAND, ESQUIRE
Ekstrand & Ekstrand, LLP
811 Ninth Street, Suite 260
Durham, NC 27701
2
1
For the Defendants:
2
1:07CV739 & 1:07CV953
3
REGINALD B. GILLESPIE, JR., ESQUIRE
Wilson & Ratledge, PLLC
4600 Marriott Drive, Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27612
4
LINWOOD E. WILSON, PRO SE
6910 Innesbrook Way
Bahama, NC 27503
5
6
1:07CV953
7
8
PAUL K. SUN, JR., ESQUIRE
Ellis & Winters, LLP
Post Office Box 33550
Raleigh, NC 27636
DIXIE T. WELLS, ESQUIRE
Ellis & Winters, LLP
333 N. Greene Street, Suite 200
Greensboro, NC 27401
9
10
11
DAN J. MCLAMB, ESQUIRE
BARBARA B. WEYHER, ESQUIRE
ALLISON J. BECKER, ESQUIRE
Yates McLamb & Weyher, LLP
Post Office Box 2889
Raleigh, NC 27602
12
13
14
15
16
Court Reporter:
Lori Russell, RMR, CRR
P.O. Box 20593
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27120
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings recorded by stenotype reporter.
Transcript produced by Computer-Aided Transcription.
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
3
P R O C E E D I N G S
1
2
THE COURT:
Counsel, the Court notes for the
3
record this is a follow-up to an earlier hearing, a status
4
conference report, held in this matter earlier in the year.
5
The Court had given the parties additional time to consider
6
this matter and determine whether or not any resolution
7
could be made as between the various parties.
8
9
The Court will note that there are two separate cases
for consideration today, the one being the case in 1:07CV739
10
involving the plaintiffs David Evans, Collin Finnerty, and
11
Reade Seligmann versus the City of Durham and others.
12
second case is that of McFadyen versus Duke in 1:07CV953.
13
The
The Court is aware that certain actions have been taken
14
with respect to some of the Defendants in the Evans matter
15
and I'll address that one first.
16
are with respect to the McFadyen case.
17
18
Then we'll see where we
Mr. Manning, do you wish to be heard in terms of where
we are in the Evans matter?
19
MR. MANNING:
Yes, Your Honor, and good morning.
20
May it please the Court, as we informed the Court
21
yesterday, we reached a resolution with the City of Durham
22
defendants -- those were the two detectives, Detective Himan
23
and Detective Gottlieb -- as well as the City of Durham
24
itself.
25
reached a resolution with Mr. Nifong yesterday and those
Those claims were dismissed yesterday.
We also
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
4
1
claims have been dismissed as well.
2
There's one remaining Defendant in the case.
That's
3
Mr. Wilson.
4
I believe we've reached an agreement to resolve the claim as
5
to him as well.
6
finalized, we'd be prepared to file a stipulation of
7
dismissal for Mr. Wilson as early as today, if not next
8
week.
9
We spoke briefly before the hearing outside and
And so subject to that agreement being
THE COURT:
Mr. Wilson, you're representing
10
yourself pro se.
11
pending with respect to joining in a motion for judgment on
12
the pleadings as to the Defendants Gottlieb and Himan and
13
you filed separate motions to dismiss for various bases, are
14
you acknowledging to the Court at this time that your case
15
is to the point of being resolved and just waiting some
16
additional procedure matters in terms of dismissal?
17
18
MR. WILSON:
Yes, sir.
As to the Evans case, yes,
sir.
19
20
To the extent your matters were still
THE COURT:
All right, sir.
Anything further, Mr. Wilson or Mr. Manning concerning
21
Evans?
22
and I have no reason to doubt that, then all the matters
23
that were involved in the Evans case would be disposed of by
24
your announcement today.
25
If what you're presenting to the Court is correct,
MR. MANNING:
That's correct, Your Honor.
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
5
1
THE COURT:
All right, sir.
To that extent, the
2
Court would ask again of Mr. Wilson, do you understand that,
3
to the extent it's been announced there has been some
4
resolution of your matters, that would be the only thing
5
awaiting the Court's determination, receiving a dismissal?
6
There would not be any additional proceedings regarding any
7
defenses that you have asserted or motions you have
8
asserted.
9
MR. WILSON:
10
THE COURT:
11
MR. WILSON:
12
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
You acknowledge that at this time?
I do, sir.
With that, that completes the matter
13
of Evans versus Durham and others.
14
your diligence in working toward a speedy resolution in that
15
matter.
16
MR. MANNING:
17
THE COURT:
18
19
I certainly appreciate
Thank you, Your Honor.
With that, unless you have some reason
to stay, I would be glad to excuse you at this point.
MR. MANNING:
I don't believe we have anything
20
further, Your Honor.
Thank you.
21
THE COURT:
All right.
22
23
Mr. Wilson, as you're acknowledging, you will stay for
the purposes of the McFadyen matter.
24
MR. WILSON:
25
THE COURT:
I'm sorry.
I didn't understand.
You will stay for purposes of the
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
6
1
2
3
4
5
McFadyen matter since you are involved in that.
MR. WILSON:
Yes.
(Mr. Manning, Mr. Davant, and Mr. Fialko left the
courtroom.)
THE COURT:
In terms of the McFadyen matters,
6
again, we have not had as much resolution as far as I know,
7
but I'll let the parties tell me where you are.
8
9
In my review of the matters, it would appear that
what's currently before the Court -- and the Court may be
10
prepared to consider some of that fairly shortly.
But it
11
would appear that Claim 18 against Defendants Brodhead,
12
Steel, Dzau, and one other defendant that is still before
13
the Court -- that's Burness, I believe -- and Duke
14
University and Duke Systems.
15
contract relating to disciplinary policies to the extent
16
it's alleged Duke did not follow their own policies -- back
17
to Count 18, it would appear it's an obstruction of justice
18
claim, except for Mr. Wilson, which seemed to be tied to the
19
criminal investigation.
20
criminal matter; but as to the other defendants that I
21
named, it seems to be an allegation relating to civil
22
obstruction of justice or affecting civil remedies.
23
indicated, Count 21, breach of contract relating to
24
disciplinary matters; Count 24, fraud against the Defendants
25
Graves, Dean, Drummond, Smith, and Duke University to the
Count 21, the breach of
That and Ms. Levicy is tied to the
As I
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
7
1
extent there is an allegation that -- representation that
2
certain matters had not been presented to the state
3
attorney -- state attorney and investigators; Count 41, to
4
the extent there's some still some constitutional claim
5
against the City.
6
As you address that from the Plaintiffs' perspective,
7
you can acknowledge whether or not those are the matters
8
based upon your understanding and we'll just go from there.
9
Yes, sir.
10
MR. EKSTRAND:
Yes, sir.
Your Honor, Bob Ekstrand
11
on behalf of the Plaintiffs.
12
the gist of what's remaining.
13
are -- there is a -- the negligent hiring retention --
14
THE COURT:
15
MR. EKSTRAND:
16
THE COURT:
17
MR. EKSTRAND:
18
THE COURT:
19
MR. EKSTRAND:
I think you have essentially
I believe, in addition, there
Yes, sir.
-- claim against --
In Count 32.
Yes, sir.
I did not include that one.
Yes, sir.
And with respect to the
20
obstruction of justice, you're correct that there are --
21
there's more than one factual basis for that and I think
22
you've articulated the two that are going forward.
23
are pending motions with respect to Count 1, which is a -- a
24
Section 1983 claim for -- arising out of the same facts that
25
give rise to the obstruction of justice claim and the state
There
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
8
1
constitutional claim.
2
the -- you have articulated everything that we have in our
3
material going forward.
4
THE COURT:
Beyond that, Your Honor, you have
Count 1, as I recall, involved a
5
question of whether or not you had earlier conceded that
6
that would go away as a result of the Court of Appeals'
7
decision after the Supreme Court had made some
8
determination.
9
MR. EKSTRAND:
10
11
Was that the essence of Count 1?
THE COURT:
That is the essence of Count 1.
All right, sir.
As a summary matter,
anything the Defendants wish to say at this point?
12
MR. SUN:
May it please the Court, Paul Sun for
13
the Duke defendants.
14
the claims that remain.
15
Mr. McLamb will address it for his client, a motion for
16
judgment on the pleadings.
17
recited by the Court are the ones that we understand remain
18
in the case.
19
Your Honor has outlined the case -There is as to Count 18, and
But those -- those claims
Thank you.
MR. MCLAMB:
Dan McLamb, Your Honor.
I concur
20
with Mr. Sun and Mr. Ekstrand.
21
pending with respect to Counts 18 and 32 on behalf my
22
clients.
23
THE COURT:
We have 12(c) motions
Have you made any particular filings
24
with respect to that, Mr. McLamb, at this point?
25
appear that there's a question over what basis the
It would
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
9
1
constitutional claim remains if there's been some
2
disposition of all individual City defendants.
3
MR. MCLAMB:
Let me see if I follow the Court.
4
Count 18 is the obstruction of justice claim.
5
the negligent retention claim.
6
THE COURT:
7
City.
Count 32 is
And I may have been speaking of the
That's my question for the City next.
8
MR. MCLAMB:
9
THE COURT:
Okay.
But to the extent -- did you have
10
anything further with respect to Count 18 to the extent
11
that's --
12
13
MR. MCLAMB:
It's been fully briefed, Your Honor,
and I think we're awaiting the Court's decision.
14
THE COURT:
All right.
15
Yes, I believe I --
16
MR. GILLESPIE:
17
THE COURT:
Thank you.
18
21
-- was looking at my notes on the
City, but I'll let you respond to that.
19
20
Your Honor --
MR. GILLESPIE:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Reggie
Gillespie for the City.
The only claim against the City in this case is a state
22
law claim under the North Carolina Constitution.
23
Count 41.
24
to that claim.
25
state law claim.
That's
As to Count 41, the City is the only defendant as
So the City is here for one claim.
It's Count 41.
It's a
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
10
1
2
THE COURT:
Have you filed something particularly
with respect to that?
3
MR. GILLESPIE:
4
THE COURT:
5
MR. GILLESPIE:
Yes, sir.
Is that currently before the Court?
Yes, Your Honor.
We filed a
6
motion for judgment on the pleadings as to that count and
7
the Plaintiffs filed a response on Tuesday of this week.
8
THE COURT:
9
All right, sir.
So generally where are we in terms of any efforts to
10
try to resolve this matter?
11
Mr. Ekstrand?
12
MR. EKSTRAND:
Where are we at this point,
Your Honor, unfortunately at the
13
same spot.
When we left here last, there was a 60-day
14
window where we expressed our interest in discussing any
15
settlement.
16
Defendants join in the discussion together for the first
17
time.
18
defendants but not yet with the City in the last discovery
19
proceeding on the fraud claim and the breach of contract
20
claim.
21
discussion.
22
three different motions that we've had to respond to and
23
haven't had any conversations about settling it during that
24
time.
25
discussion.
We actually raised the idea of having all the
We've already gone down that path with the Duke
In the interim, we have -- we have not had any
We've raised it, but we've instead received
So we're still in the same place, still open to
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
11
1
THE COURT:
In terms of just generally -- and the
2
Court, as I said, fairly shortly will make some rulings.
3
But particularly as to Mr. Wilson in terms of the counts
4
that remain against him, the Court is concerned -- even
5
though you identified Count 5 as being the one that you were
6
conceding, Count 1 seemed to be at issue as well.
7
But in terms of Count 18 in particular, if it involves
8
obstruction of justice, similar conduct that Gottlieb and
9
Himan were involved in, the Court's analysis -- even though
10
Gottlieb and Himan may be out of the case at this point, the
11
Court's analysis of Mr. Wilson's case may, of necessity,
12
discuss Gottlieb and Himan even though they're out just
13
because of his motion to join in to that.
14
aware of that.
Just to make you
15
Do you wish to be heard since -- you've already briefed
16
that somewhat, but do you wish to be heard to the extent the
17
Court is indicating to you that whatever ruling it might
18
have made with respect to Gottlieb and Himan, may also
19
affect the Court's consideration in Mr. Wilson's case?
20
MR. EKSTRAND:
Your Honor, I think -- the only
21
thing I'd what to emphasize is that we did want to have
22
conversations with all the Defendants about their status in
23
the case.
24
like to do that and we'll -- you know, we intend to have
25
that conversation with Mr. Wilson to the extent that the
Mr. Wilson is included in those.
We still would
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
12
1
Court leaves open that claim against him before we do -- I'm
2
sorry.
3
him before we do, obviously that will resolve the case
4
against him, but we still have every intention to have a
5
conversation with him about his continuing status in the
6
case.
If the Court were to eliminate that claim against
7
But as to the substance, you know, what the Fourth
8
Circuit has ruled with respect to police officers being sued
9
for obstruction of justice, we've briefed that fully and I
10
think our point is essentially there's a limited holding to
11
police officers and obstruction of justice.
12
that Mr. Wilson qualifies.
13
North Carolina Supreme Court would carve out that exception.
14
I don't think they've carved it out in the first place, but
15
I don't think that they would extend what the Fourth Circuit
16
has ruled to apply to assistants, to district attorneys who
17
are involved in the obstruction of justice.
18
19
THE COURT:
I also don't think that our
Are we talking about initiation or are
we talking about participation at this point?
20
MR. EKSTRAND:
21
THE COURT:
22
I don't think
Participation.
Do you think that's still open after
the Farm Bureau case?
23
MR. EKSTRAND:
I do.
I do.
I think under -- yes,
24
I do.
I think that his participation in the ongoing
25
conspiracy as a latecomer is still a viable theory.
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
13
1
THE COURT:
All right.
Counsel, to the extent
2
I've opened the door for some discussion of that -- and it
3
may involve Ms. Levicy as well.
4
18 as relates to that allegation or factual pattern, I've
5
opened the door.
6
well.
7
opportunity if you wish to follow up somewhat, particularly
8
in view of the argument the Plaintiff is now making.
9
To the extent that -- Count
Mr. Ekstrand, I'll hear from the others as
I know you've filed briefs, but I'm giving you this
MR. SUN:
May it please the Court, let me
10
advise -- because the Court asked about settlement
11
discussions.
12
through and the Court is aware of a mediation process; and
13
our mediator, Mr. Harkavy, declared an impasse.
14
Court's encouragement at the last status conference hearing,
15
we contacted Mr. Harkavy promptly and invited him to
16
reinitiate discussions because that's the -- that's the best
17
way we thought to see if there were discussions worth having
18
and we've heard nothing in that regard substantively in
19
response to that.
As we advised the Court before, we did go
But at the
So I wanted to let the Court know that.
20
And with the Court's permission, I think Mr. McLamb is
21
the one properly to address the county team legal arguments
22
for Your Honor.
23
24
25
Thank you.
THE COURT:
Mr. McLamb, I keep passing over you.
I'll hear from you.
MR. MCLAMB:
And you can hear from me, Your Honor,
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
14
1
only to the extent you ask that you need to hear from me.
2
do think we fully briefed our position on that.
3
particular question that the Court has?
4
THE COURT:
No, sir.
I
Was there a
Just giving you an
5
opportunity to respond to anything Mr. Ekstrand might have
6
added.
7
MR. MCLAMB:
No, sir.
I'm content.
I'll be happy
8
to address any questions you have, but I think we've argued
9
that in our briefs.
10
that relates to our arguing that motion.
11
12
I don't hear anything specific from him
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
Anything further,
Mr. Gillespie?
13
MR. GILLESPIE:
Well, Your Honor, Count 18 is not
14
directed to the City, so I don't have anything to add or
15
subtract from that.
16
think relating to -- I want to make sure I fully answer the
17
Court's question as to Count 41, at least I've attempted to,
18
as far as its status.
19
that?
20
The Court did have a question earlier I
Did the Court have a question about
That is the only count pending against the City.
THE COURT:
Yes, sir.
All right.
Nothing else
21
appearing, I've indicated, to the extent the matter is
22
remaining, what the trial date may be.
23
the extent there's any need for discovery matters, you
24
should take care of that before that time.
25
has been set.
In the interim, to
The trial date
As to any matters remaining, the Court may
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
15
1
2
continue to rule on this matter.
And I may have made inadvertent reference to Farm
3
Bureau h\as relates to these matters, but I believe that
4
related to the malicious prosecution charge in terms of the
5
elements there.
6
All right.
7
Gentlemen, anything further?
Gentlemen or
ladies, anything further?
8
MR. GILLESPIE:
Your Honor, I just wanted the
9
Court to be aware, with regard to the City's participation
10
and role in this case, this case was stayed as to the City
11
until just recently.
12
as to the count asserted against the City.
13
There's been no discovery whatsoever
We view the City's -- the case against the City on a
14
decidedly different track than the remainder of this case;
15
and based on that and for other reasons, we have filed a
16
motion to sever the count as to the City.
17
filed a few weeks ago.
18
response has run yet.
19
of that.
20
we're on a very different track.
21
certainly not feasible from our perspective.
22
appropriate resolution for that is for a severance, and so
23
we have filed a motion and brief in support of that.
That motion was
I don't think the deadline for
I simply wanted the Court to be aware
From the City's perspective, like I said, we think
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. EKSTRAND:
An October trial date is
We think the
Yes, sir, I'll hear from you.
We will -- we'll brief the motion
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
16
1
to sever, our opposition to it, but I think, Your Honor,
2
this case has been alive and at notice to the City.
3
had notice of all the allegations for quite some time.
4
think that an October trial date will, I'm sure, test all of
5
us, but we stand prepared to proceed through discovery and
6
do what we need to do so that we are ready.
7
the Defendants to do the same to the extent the Court --
8
9
10
THE COURT:
They've
I
We expect all
Will your response in writing be
substantially different than that, Mr. Ekstrand, in terms of
motion to sever?
11
MR. EKSTRAND:
Hopefully it will be a little more
12
articulate, but we will oppose it and we'll deal more with
13
the authorities with respect to severing a defendant at this
14
stage.
15
THE COURT:
I was trying to give you a hint.
If
16
you said you've said enough, then I'm prepared to rule on
17
that at this time.
18
has said, but this matter has been ongoing for some time and
19
I would not intend to sever the City.
20
I've considered what the Defendant City
You'll just have to pick up speed a little bit in terms
21
of filing any discovery that you need to file.
22
pursue that with the magistrate judge to the extent you need
23
expedited discovery.
24
the record, I would deny your motion to sever.
25
You can
But just since you're all here, for
MR. GILLESPIE:
Your Honor, we certainly respect
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
17
1
and appreciate the Court's consideration.
2
would look at the reasons for it.
3
District itself, severance is appropriate to avoid confusion
4
and prejudice; and we think we've made the case for that in
5
our motion and brief; and we hope the Court would take a
6
look and consider that before it denies the motion.
7
obviously yield gracefully to whatever ruling this Court
8
makes, and we'll respect and adhere to that.
9
We hope the Court
In this court, Middle
We
But we are in a position, we believe, of prejudice
10
given the way the case is.
11
Plaintiffs made a -- filed a 428 page, 1,300 allegation
12
complaint that largely has been disposed of.
13
years to do that, but ultimately the bulk of this case has
14
gone away as to the City.
15
forward on discovery, so we do want an opportunity to defend
16
ourselves.
17
to whatever ruling this Court makes.
18
It's not our fault that the
It took seven
There's never been anything going
Again, though, we respect and yield gracefully
THE COURT:
I will review it and particularly will
19
give -- how much time do you need to file any additional
20
response, Mr. Ekstrand?
21
the Court could consider this matter in a timely fashion.
22
MR. EKSTRAND:
I would want to expedite that so
If you could give me until -- well,
23
through Wednesday, I believe I could have it fully briefed
24
to you by then.
25
THE COURT:
All right, sir.
The Court will delay
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
18
1
any formal ruling, but just giving you an indication of how
2
the Court feels at this point in terms of this matter having
3
been continued against all the parties.
4
surprises here in terms of what the arguments are, but if --
5
with the Plaintiff agreeing to have until Wednesday, the
6
21st, to file its response, then the Court will allow that
7
as an expedited time frame and would consider formally the
8
motion to sever at that time.
9
MR. SUN:
10
There's been no
Your Honor, may I address two other
points briefly with regard to the trial?
11
THE COURT:
12
MR. SUN:
Yes, sir.
One, with respect I think to both
13
parties, we would benefit to the extent the Court is able to
14
give us a specific trial date.
15
Duke defendants and Mr. Ekstrand can certainly speak for his
16
clients.
17
defendants remaining on the specific counts, including the
18
president of the university; and so just for planning
19
purposes -- and I know the Court has other things to balance
20
as well, but I'd ask that too.
21
can speak to that, but he's got a client -- one of his
22
clients, at least the last I knew, was in the military.
23
those kind of things take some planning and the like.
24
the extent the parties could ask for that, we would.
25
I'll speak first for the
There are, obviously, a number of individual
Again, I know Mr. Ekstrand
So
So to
And then, second, Your Honor, as the Court has -- has
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
19
1
acknowledged in going through this process and setting up
2
the sequence of events, the -- the pending motion on the
3
Count 18, obstruction of justice claim, will obviously
4
affect what discovery goes forward.
5
Court has recognized that in the way it's sequenced things.
6
We're set up with our 26(f) conference with Judge Peake next
7
Friday and I -- again, the parties would clearly benefit
8
from guidance from the Court on -- to the extent we get
9
further comments from the Court on the claims that are going
10
11
And so, again, the
forward and specifically Count 18.
Thank you, Your Honor.
12
THE COURT:
13
MR. WILSON:
14
just a clarification.
15
that, are they to be heard today or at another time or --
16
THE COURT:
All right, sir.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Wilson.
In respect to my Count 18,
The motions that have been filed on
As indicated at the suggestion of the
17
other parties, the Court is in the process of making a
18
determination as to those claims and will be filed as a part
19
of the order.
20
argument -- any specific argument on that, but the Court
21
will be prepared shortly to enter an order as to all matters
22
that are pending.
Everyone may not have come prepared today for
23
MR. WILSON:
All right.
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. GILLESPIE:
Thank you, sir.
Anything further, counsel?
Your Honor, with regard to the
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
20
1
City's pending judgment for motion on the pleadings, I just
2
want to make the Court aware that is almost ripe for
3
consideration.
4
to, provide a reply orally.
5
shortly on that as well, however the Court wants to proceed,
6
but we do want the Court to be aware we do have a
7
dispositive Rule 12(c) motion pending.
8
9
I certainly could today, if the Court wanted
THE COURT:
We can formally file a reply
All right, sir.
Has the -- I'll let
you proceed as you're proceeding now and I'll consider that
10
to the extent I need to do anything further as a part of a
11
written order to you.
12
13
MR. GILLESPIE:
and file a written response.
14
THE COURT:
15
MR. GILLESPIE:
16
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir, Your Honor.
We'll be
glad to do that.
17
THE COURT:
18
MR. SUN:
19
I take it you want me to go ahead
Honor.
Anything further, counsel?
Nothing for the Duke defendants, Your
Thank you.
20
THE COURT:
21
MR. MCLAMB:
Mr. McLamb.
Nothing further, Your Honor.
I would
22
echo Mr. Sun's comments.
Obviously, my involvement in the
23
case is on those two claims, 18 and 32, so the Court's
24
ruling will have a big impact on what I do in the next few
25
months.
5/16/14 - 1:07CV739 and 1:07CV953 - STATUS CONFERENCE
21
1
2
THE COURT:
All right, sir.
Thank you very much.
Counsel, again, thank you for reporting back to the
3
Court.
We will proceed as we have been.
4
have a meeting with or hearing before Judge Peake.
5
intention to address those matters in a timely fashion so
6
that you can know what's before you at that time.
7
further?
8
MR. MCLAMB:
9
THE COURT:
10
11
12
I understand you
It is my
Anything
Nothing here, Your Honor.
We'll be in recess until further
notice.
MR. EKSTRAND:
Thank you, Your Honor.
(Proceedings concluded at 10:32 a.m.)
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
C E R T I F I C A T E
I, LORI RUSSELL, RMR, CRR, United States District Court
Reporter for the Middle District of North Carolina, DO
HEREBY CERTIFY:
That the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of
the proceedings had in the within-entitled action; that I
reported the same in stenotype to the best of my ability and
thereafter reduced same to typewriting through the use of
Computer-Aided Transcription.
20
21
Date:
22
23
24
25
6/16/14
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?