From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hill v. Railroad

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Jun 2, 2010
Civil No. 09-3289 (JRT/FLN) (D. Minn. Jun. 2, 2010)

Opinion

Civil No. 09-3289 (JRT/FLN).

June 2, 2010

Daniel Gustafson and Michelle Looby, GUSTAFSON GLUEK PLLC, 608 Second Avenue South, Suite 650, Minneapolis, MN 55402, for plaintiff.

Barbara Jean D'Aquila, FULBRIGHT JAWORSKI LLP, 80 South Eighth Street, Suite 2100, Minneapolis, MN 55402, for defendant.


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on the parties' stipulated motion for stay of proceedings pending settlement discussions [Docket No. 20].

Based upon the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED and this matter shall be stayed immediately, subject to the terms and conditions set forth below:

1. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment is withdrawn and will not be asserted again;

2. The Parties will discuss settlement in good faith;

3. While settlement discussions are ongoing, obligations regarding the Rule 26(f) meeting/report, the Rule 26(a) disclosures, and the Rule 16 conference are suspended and indefinitely postponed;

4. If settlement negotiations are successful, the Parties will notify the Court as promptly as possible;

5. If settlement negotiations do not result in settlement, the Parties will notify the Court within 14 days after the parties agree that settlement negotiations have failed;

6. Plaintiff may serve an amended complaint within 20 days after the notification to the Court as set forth in the immediately preceding clause and may assert all claims he had as of the date he filed his original complaint;

7. Defendant may answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint within 20 days after its service and will have all claims and defenses available as of the date Plaintiff filed his original complaint (and thereafter); and

8. Upon filing of the answer or other response, as appropriate, the Court shall set deadlines for the Rule 26(f) meeting/report, the Rule 26(a) disclosures, and the Rule 16 conference.


Summaries of

Hill v. Railroad

United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Jun 2, 2010
Civil No. 09-3289 (JRT/FLN) (D. Minn. Jun. 2, 2010)
Case details for

Hill v. Railroad

Case Details

Full title:DEMETRIUS HILL, SR, Plaintiff, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Minnesota

Date published: Jun 2, 2010

Citations

Civil No. 09-3289 (JRT/FLN) (D. Minn. Jun. 2, 2010)