From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

East West Resort Dev. v. L.P.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 13, 2011
CASE NO. 2:10-CV-01394-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Sep. 13, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:10-CV-01394-JAM-DAD

09-13-2011

EAST WEST RESORT DEVELOPMENT v. , L.P, a Delaware limited partnership; NORTHSTAR BIG HORN, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and NORTHSTAR IRON HORSE, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and OLD GREENWOOD, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; Plaintiffs, v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvania corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive; Defendants.

SEDGWICK LLP Dennis G. Rolstad Attorneys for Defendant ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY SPROUL TROST, LLP Thomas G. Trost Jason M. Sherman Attorneys for Plaintiffs EAST WEST RESORT DEVELOPMENT V., L.P., NORTHSTAR BIG HORN, LLC, NORTHSTAR IRON HORSE, LLC, AND OLD GREENWOOD, LLC


SEDGWICK LLP

BRUCE D. CELEBREZZE Bar No. 102181

DENNIS G. ROLSTAD Bar No. 150006

ANDREW J. KING Bar No. 253962

Attorneys for Defendant

ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE

COMPANY

SPROUL TROST LLP

THOMAS G. TROST Bar No. 151961

JASON M. SHERMAN Bar No. 232420

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

EAST WEST RESORT DEVELOPMENT V.,

L.P., NORTHSTAR BIG HORN, LLC,

NORTHSTAR IRON HORSE, LLC, AND

OLD GREENWOOD, LLC

AMENDED STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING CERTAIN PRETRIAL

DATES DURING SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS, AND ALLOWING FOR

MORE THAN TEN DEPOSITIONS

JUDGE: Hon. John A. Mendez

MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Hon. Dale A. Drozd

TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Through this stipulation and proposed order, defendant ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY ("Defendant" or "ACE") and plaintiffs EAST WEST RESORT DEVELOPMENT V., L.P. ("East West"), NORTHSTAR BIG HORN, LLC ("NBH"), NORTHSTAR IRON HORSE, LLC ("NIH"), and OLD GREENWOOD, LLC ("Old Greenwood") (together "Plaintiffs"), collectively referred to herein as the "Parties," stipulate, pursuant to Civil Local Rules 143 and 144, and request that the Court enter an Order to extend certain pretrial dates, as follows:

The Parties are currently in settlement discussions, and in order to allow such discussions to further take place without the taking of depositions or other certain other discovery proceedings, the Parties, pursuant to Local Rules 143 and 144, jointly request and HEREBY STIPULATE that certain pretrial dates for this action be extended as follows.

1. The Parties shall make expert witness disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) by November 22 , 2011, and supplemental disclosures and disclosures of any rebuttal witnesses under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C) by December 6, 2011;

2. The Parties shall complete one day of mediation by October 31, 2011;

3. All discovery shall be completed by December 16, 2011;

4. A second day of mediation of this matter, to be held after the close of discovery and before the filing of any dispositive motions, shall take place no later than December 29, 2011.

5. All dispositive motions shall be filed by December 30, 2011;

6. Hearing on such motions shall be on February 8, 2012, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom # 6;

7. The final pre-trial conference is set for March 23, 2012, at 10:00 a.m..; and

8. Jury trial in this matter is set for April 30, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.

In addition, the subject matter of this dispute involves the actions of numerous third parties including claimants or beneficiaries of payments (for which Plaintiffs seek reimbursement from ACE), other payees, the general contractor, subcontractors, retained consultants, and several other relevant third parties. Therefore, in the event that the current settlement discussions are unsuccessful, the Parties anticipate that ACE will need to take more than ten (10) depositions in this action, and HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATE that ACE may be relieved of the 10 deposition limit set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2)(A)(i) as follows:

1. ACE is permitted to take more than ten (10) depositions in this action, and

2. ACE may take up to eighteen (18) depositions in this action, plus expert depositions (which the parties agree our not included in that total) without obtaining further leave of court and without prejudice to later seeking to take additional depositions through motion or stipulation and order.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD:

SEDGWICK LLP

Dennis G. Rolstad

Attorneys for Defendant

ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

SPROUL TROST, LLP

By: Jason M. Sherman

Thomas G. Trost

Jason M. Sherman

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

EAST WEST RESORT DEVELOPMENT V., L.P.,

NORTHSTAR BIG HORN, LLC, NORTHSTAR IRON

HORSE, LLC, AND OLD GREENWOOD, LLC

I hereby attest that I have on file all holograph signatures for any signatures indicated by a "conformed" signature (/s/) within this e-filed document.

Dennis G. Rolstad

ORDER ON STIPULATION

Pursuant to the stipulation of the Parties, and good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS SO ORDERED.

THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE


Summaries of

East West Resort Dev. v. L.P.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 13, 2011
CASE NO. 2:10-CV-01394-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Sep. 13, 2011)
Case details for

East West Resort Dev. v. L.P.

Case Details

Full title:EAST WEST RESORT DEVELOPMENT v. , L.P, a Delaware limited partnership…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 13, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. 2:10-CV-01394-JAM-DAD (E.D. Cal. Sep. 13, 2011)