Summary
dismissing plaintiffs' negligence claim as barred by the PSTCA because "[n]one of the enumerated exceptions found in § 8542(b) apply to these facts" and "[w]here the exceptions do not apply, recovery on a negligence theory in barred"
Summary of this case from Marks v. Phila. Indus. Corr. Ctr.Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-8398
January 9, 2003
SCHEDULING ORDER
AND NOW, this 9th day of January, 2003, after conference with counsel, the Court hereby enters the following Scheduling Order to govern further proceedings in this case:
1. Counsel for the parties are directed to discuss holding a settlement conference with Magistrate Judge Carol Sandra Moore Wells. If a settlement conference is mutually agreeable, the parties are directed to contact Judge Rufe's chambers to request a settlement conference date.
2. All fact discovery shall be completed by May 1, 2003.
3. All expert discovery shall be completed within thirty days of the close of fact discovery.
4. All motions for summary judgment and partial summary judgment shall be filed within thirty (30) days after the close of expert discovery. Responses to any motions for summary judgment shall be filed within the time permitted under Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(c).
5. A final pretrial conference will be held on September 11, 2003, at 4 p.m. At least one of the attorneys for each party shall have the authority to enter into stipulations and to make admissions regarding all matters.
Final pretrial memoranda shall be filed pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 16.1(c) and shall contain all items listed in that rule, including the following: a jurisdictional statement; statement (or, in Defendant's memorandum, counterstatement) of the facts of the case; damages computation, or description of other relief sought; list of intended witnesses, designated separately for liability and damages; schedule of exhibits to be offered at trial; estimate of required trial time; and special comments regarding legal issues, stipulations, amendments of pleadings, or other appropriate matters. Plaintiff shall file its pretrial memorandum August 29, 2003. Defendant shall file its pretrial memorandum by September 8, 2003.
In addition to the above, if applicable, each party is required to submit the following in conjunction with the pretrial memoranda: proposed voir dire questions, proposed jury instructions (one point per page), proposed jury interrogatories, a trial memorandum on the legal issues involved in the case, and any motions in limine. The failure to submit proposed jury instructions may result in the forfeiture of your right to object to omissions in jury charge. If possible, counsel should provide the Court with copies of the proposed jury instructions and jury interrogatories on 3.5" IBM compatible computer diskettes, in a format readable by WordPerfect 9. If this is a non-jury trial, each party is required to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law on the date on which its pretrial memorandum is due.
In preparation for the final pretrial conference, counsel are expected to communicate with each other on the following matters in an effort to reach agreement or, if agreement is not possible, to submit, the precise points in dispute, in writing, in a joint statement on the following: (a) agreed upon and disputed facts; (b) objections to any proposed witnesses; (c) objections to any proposed exhibits (including objections to genuineness and authenticity); (d) objections to any depositions to be read at trial; (e) disputed legal issues; (f) amendments to pleadings; (g) stipulated to and disputed points for charge; (h) verdict sheet and special interrogatories; and (i) number of days required for trial.
6. This case is scheduled for a September 23, 2003 trial pool.
It is so ORDERED.