Opinion
Civil Action No. 05-cv-01126-WDM-BNB.
March 23, 2006
ORDER
This matter is before me on the Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling Order to Suspend Deadlines [Doc. # 89, filed 3/21/06] (the "Motion"). The Motion essentially seeks an order staying the case pending a ruling on dispositive motions, some of which are filed and some of which apparently would be filed in the future. The Motion is DENIED.
As grounds for the Motion and requested stay, the parties assert that: (1) they are engaged in discussions which, if successful, may "resolve certain issues raised by plaintiffs' complaint"; (2) the defendant has filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment which, if granted, could resolve the case in whole or in part; and (3) the parties have appealed to the circuit court a ruling denying in part the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. According to the parties, "[t]he results of the appeal could also do much to clarify the issues, if any, as to which a trial is necessary."
The parties in the majority of cases filed in this court engage in settlement discussions while the case is pending and/or file motions to dismiss and for summary judgment. Most of the dispositive motions are denied in whole or in part, requiring that the cases proceed further. It would unreasonably delay the preparation of a case for trial and, potentially, the trial of the case if stays were granted while settlement discussions occur or dispositive motions are pending. Consequently, it is the practice in this district not to stay cases on these bases. The parties have done nothing here to persuade me that this case should be treated differently.
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED.