Elliott v. First Federal Community Bank of Bucyrus
ORDER: Defendant has agreed to withdraw its pending Motion for Summary Judgment 42 . The Clerk is DIRECTED to remove Defendant's Motion from the pending motions list. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on March 12, 2018. (jlk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
GEORGE RALPH ELLIOTT,
Case No. 2:17-cv-42
Judge Algenon L. Marbley
Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. Deavers
FIRST FEDERAL COMMUNITY
BANK OF BUCYRUS,
The Court conducted a status conference, by telephone, on March 8, 2018. Counsel for
all parties appeared and participated in the conference.
The Court advised the parties that it was inclined to grant Defendant’s motion to amend
its answer to add a foreclosure counterclaim and, since that conference, the motion has been
granted. (ECF No. 55.) Plaintiff may respond to Defendant’s Counterclaim within rule.
Defendant advised that it does not need additional discovery related to its Counterclaim
and that it is ready to move for summary judgment on that claim. Plaintiff, however, anticipates
that he will need approximately sixty (60) days to complete discovery related to the
Counterclaim. Following the filing of responses to the Counterclaim,1 the Court will establish a
firm schedule for completing such discovery and for filing dispositive motions.
In light of this procedural posture, Defendant has agreed to withdraw its pending Motion
for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 42) and, once the new schedule is established, Defendant
Defendant names Plaintiff, Virginia Golan-Elliott, and the Union County Treasurer in
anticipates filing one comprehensive motion that addresses Plaintiff’s claims and the
Counterclaim. The Clerk is therefore DIRECTED to remove Defendant’s Motion (ECF No. 42)
from the Court’s pending motions list.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: March 12, 2018
/s/ Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers
ELIZABETH A. PRESTON DEAVERS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?