Heid et al v. Aderholt et al

Filing 100

ORDER granting 99 Plaintiffs' MOTION to Vacate the parties' mediation previously set for March 2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 2/6/24. (sem)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION RAY SCOTT HEID, et al., Plaintiff, Case No. 2:20-cv-901 Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. Deavers v. LT. TODD ADERHOLT, et al., Defendants. ORDER On January 22, 2024, the Clerk of Court issued a Notice advising the parties that this case had been identified as ready for a mediation conference in March 2024. (ECF No. 98.) That Notice directed counsel to confer concerning the readiness of this case for a settlement conference, and if all counsel agreed that a mediation should not be scheduled, then the Notice instructed counsel to send an email to the Clerk by no later than 4:00pm EST on February 1, 2024, to advise the Court of that fact. (Id.) The Clerk’s Notice expressly set forth that this procedure, and this deadline, was established “[i]n order to avoid the administrative costs associated with vacating a case after it has been set.” (Id.) Counsel in this case did not send an email to the Clerk by the deadline, so on February 2, 2024 the Court designated a mediator. But then, on February 5, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Vacate March Mediation, submitting that “[b]oth parties agree that it would not be a good use of judicial resources to attempt a mediation as both parties believe it would not be fruitful.” (ECF No. 99.) 1    The Court does not appreciate Plaintiffs’ filing, because the parties did not comply with the Clerk’s Notice – they either failed to confer in a timely manner as instructed, failed to timely notify the Clerk by the February 1, 2024 deadline as instructed, or both.1 While the Clerk’s Notice states that “[n]othing . . . is intended to preclude a timely motion to vacate or continue a settlement conference, should the grounds for such motion become apparent only after the case is set for a settlement conference on a specific date and time,” the subject Motion only arises out of counsel’s noncompliance with the Clerk’s Notice. (ECF No. 98 (emphasis added).) Accordingly, the subject Motion has resulted in exactly the type of wasted time and resources (by both the Court and the mediator) which the Clerk’s Notice was expressly designed to prevent. Those issues notwithstanding, the Court will generously construe the subject Motion as having established good cause. Accordingly, the subject Motion (ECF No. 99) is GRANTED. The parties’ mediation previously set for March 2024 is hereby VACATED. Any future failures to comply with Court notices or Orders will not be met with such generosity. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: February 6, 2024 /s/ Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers ELIZABETH A. PRESTON DEAVERS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE   1   The Court notes that this is not the first time the parties have missed a deadline in this action since Plaintiffs retained counsel. (See ECF No. 95 (“No dispositive motions were filed by the December 1, 2023 deadline”).) 2   

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?