Opinion
2:17-CV-01968- KJN
07-01-2021
ROGER DRIVER, Plaintiff, v. PAPÉ TRUCKS, INC. AN OREGON CORPORATION, Defendant. AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS.
CHARLES S. PAINTER, REBECCA L. MENENDEZ, ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT Attorneys for Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff, PAPÉ TRUCKS, INC. CUTTER LAW P.C., C. BROOKS CUTTER, CELINE E. CUTTER Attorneys for Plaintiff, ROGER DRIVER GIBSON ROBB & LINDH LLP, JOSHUA E. KIRSCH, R. HUDSON HOLLISTER Attorneys for Plaintiff-In-Intervention, ACCIDENT FUND INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA. WOOD SMITH HENNING & BERMAN, LLP, CARLA N. BRAUNSTEIN C.G. BRANDON GNEKOW Attorneys for Third Party Defendant JOMAR INVESTMENTS, INC.
Action Filed: 09/21/2017.
Trial Dated: 12/07/2021.
CHARLES S. PAINTER, REBECCA L. MENENDEZ, ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT Attorneys for Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff, PAPÉ TRUCKS, INC.
CUTTER LAW P.C., C. BROOKS CUTTER, CELINE E. CUTTER Attorneys for Plaintiff, ROGER DRIVER
GIBSON ROBB & LINDH LLP, JOSHUA E. KIRSCH, R. HUDSON HOLLISTER Attorneys for Plaintiff-In-Intervention, ACCIDENT FUND INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA.
WOOD SMITH HENNING & BERMAN, LLP, CARLA N. BRAUNSTEIN C.G. BRANDON GNEKOW Attorneys for Third Party Defendant JOMAR INVESTMENTS, INC.
ORDER ON STIPULATION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER
1
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
WHEREAS plaintiff filed his complaint on September 21, 2017.
WHEREAS on March 9, 2018 this court issues its Pre-Trial Scheduling Order which indicated, among other things, “… that this order shall not be modified except by leave of court upon a showing of good cause…. “
WHEREAS the court previously modified the order for good cause and issued the current operative scheduling order on June 25, 2020;
WHEREAS the parties have agreed and stipulated, by and through their respective undersigned counsel, that due to a delay in completing discovery as a result of the pandemic, the current scheduling order be modified as follows:
2:17-CV-01968-KJN
Case No.
Case Name:
DRIVER V. PAPE TRUCKS, INC., et al.
MATTER
CURRENT DATE
PROPOSED NEW DATE
COURT'S ORDER
LAW AND MOTION (EXCEPT FOR DISCOVERY MOTIONS)
October 6, 2021
March 7, 2022
March 7, 2022
EXPERT DISCLOSURES
July 6, 2021
December 6, 2021
December 6, 2021
EXPERT DISCLOSURE REBUTTAL
August 4, 2021
January 4, 2022
January 4, 2022
DISCOVERY CUT OFF
September 10, 2021
February 7, 2022
February 7, 2022
FINAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERNECE
October 20, 2021
March 21, 2022
(none set)
JURY TRIAL
December 7, 2021
May 9, 2022
(none set)
ORDER
Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, the court finds good cause to modify the scheduling order (ECF No. 61) and adopts the amended deadlines proposed by the parties as set forth in the chart above. The undersigned declines to set final pretrial conference and trial dates at this juncture, however. Instead, the court orders the parties to submit a Joint Notice of Trial Readiness on one of the following timelines:
A. After resolution of any pending dispositive motions, the parties are to submit the Notice not later than thirty (30) days after receiving the ruling(s) on the last filed dispositive motion(s); or
B. If the parties do not intend to file dispositive motions, the parties are ordered to file the Notice not later than one hundred twenty (120) days after the close of discovery, and the notice must include statements of intent to forgo the filing of dispositive motions. In the Joint Notice of Trial Readiness, the parties are to set forth the appropriateness of special procedures, their estimated trial length, any request for a jury, their availability for trial, and if the parties are willing to attend a settlement conference. The Notice shall also estimate how many court days each party will require to present its case, including opening statements and closing arguments. The parties' estimate shall include time necessary for jury selection, time necessary to finalize jury instructions and instruct the jury. After review of the parties' Joint Notice of Trial Readiness, the court will issue an order that sets forth dates for a final pretrial conference and trial.