Vandergriff et al v. Clermont County Public Library Board of Trustees

Filing 16

RULE 26(f) REPORT by Plaintiffs George Vandergriff, Cathy Vandergriff, Institute for Principled Policy, Defendant Clermont County Public Library Board of Trustees. (Langdon, David)

Download PDF
Vandergriff et al v. Clermont County Public Library Board of Trustees Doc. 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION GEOR __ VANDERGRIFF, _ al. _____GE ____________et____ Plaintiff(s) v. CLERMO __ COUNTY _____ _______NT _______PUBLIC___ LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Defendant(s) : : : : : : : : : 1:08-cv-381 Case No. ______________ Judge Michael R. Barrett JOINT DISCOVERY PLAN (RULE 26(f) REPORT) (REQUIRED FORM) Now come all parties to this case, by and through their respective counsel, and hereby jointly submit to the Court this Joint Discovery Plan, pursuant to the Court's Trial August 7, 2008 Procedure Order. The parties conducted their discovery conference on _______________. A. MAGISTRATE CONSENT The Parties: G G G unanimously consent to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c). do not unanimously consent to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c). unanimously give contingent consent to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c), for trial purposes only, in the event that the District Judge assigned is unavailable on the date set for trial (e.g. because of other trial settings, civil or criminal). Dockets.Justia.com B. RULE 26(a) DISCLOSURES G G G The parties have exchanged pre-discovery disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). August 28, 2008 The parties will exchange such disclosures by _______________________ The parties are exempt from disclosures under Rule 26(a)(1)(E). NOTE: Rule 26(a) disclosures are not to be filed with the Court. C. DISCOVERY ISSUES AND DATES 1. Discovery will need to be conducted on the issues of ___nt_f______to_____________on _________________practices____ Plai _if s intend _ conduct discovery __ the Library's policies and ______ _onc__ning the_____library___________and, ____broadly,_their _____for _ c __ er _____ use of ____ meeting rooms ___ more _____ ___ claims __ 2. The parties recommend that discovery G G G G 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. need not be bifurcated should be bifurcated between liability and damages should be bifurcated between factual and expert should be limited in some fashion or focused upon particular issues which relate to __________________________________________ declaratory and injunctive relief, and damages. Defendant's position is that all issues are moot except for damages. Disclosure and report of Plaintiff(s) expert(s) by October 15, 2008 _____________________ Disclosure and report of Defendant(s) expert(s) by January 15, 2009 ___________________ Disclosure and report of rebuttal expert(s) by _______________________ February 27, 2009 Disclosure of non-expert (fact) witnesses __________________________ October 1, 2008 Discovery cutoff _________________________ March 31, 2009 Anticipated discovery problems G G ______________________________________________________ None 2 D. LIMITATIONS ON DISCOVERY 1. Changes in the limitations on discovery G G G G G Extension of time limitations (currently one day of seven hours) in taking of depositions to __________________. Extension of number of depositions (currently 10) permitted to __________. Extension of number ________________. of interrogatories (currently 25) to Other: _________________________________________________. None E. PROTECTIVE ORDER G G A protective order will likely be submitted to the Court on or before _______________. The parties currently do not anticipate the need for a protective order. If the parties subsequently deem that one is necessary, they will submit a joint proposed order to the Court. Such order will be in compliance with Procter & Gamble Co. v. Bankers Trust Co., 78 F. 3d 219 (6th Cir. 1996). F. SETTLEMENT A settlement demand ______ has _______ has not been made. A response ______ has _______ has not been made. August 22, 2008 A demand can be made by ______________ September 5, 2008 A response can be made by _____________ G. MOTION DEADLINES 1. 2. 3. November 3, 2008 Motion to amend the pleadings and/or add parties by ________________ December 1, 2008 Motions relative to the pleadings by _________________ Dispositive motions by _________________ May 1, 2009 3 H. OTHER MATTERS PERTINENT TO MANAGEMENT OF THIS LITIGATION None ____.__________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ / _ David R. Langdon Signatures: _s/ __________________ Attorney for Plaintiff(s) ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ /s_Mary Lynne _______DRL, w/ authorization) _ / ________ Birck (by ____ Attorney for Defendant(s) _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ Attorney for Defendant(s) _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ Attorney for ___________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ ____________________ Attorney for __________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ Attorney for __________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ 4

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?