FULLER v. HEINTZ/CANDEE

Full title: JASON R. FULLER, Plaintiff, v. PATRICIA HEINTZ/CANDEE, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin

Date published: Mar 21, 2008

07-C-305-C (W.D. Wis. Mar. 21, 2008)

Opinion

07-C-305-C.

March 21, 2008

ORDER

STEPHEN CROCKER, Magistrate Judge

This case was filed on June 5, 2007, and at the August 1, 2007 telephonic preliminary pretrial conference, this court set the entire schedule in consultation with counsel, leading to a firm trial date of May 12, 2008. That's the last the court heard from the parties until March 6, 2008 when defendant's attorney filed a motion to withdraw. According to counsel, defendant fired her because she had been "insufficiently confrontational" during settlement negotiations. See dkts. 7-8. On March 14, 2008, new counsel appeared on behalf of defendant, see dkt. 10. That same day, plaintiff's attorney asked that the discovery deadline of April 11, 2008 be extended by two weeks because the parties had agreed to stay discovery during settlement negotiations. Counsel avers that on February 22, 2008 he had been advised by defendant's attorney that the defendant had accepted plaintiff's settlement proposal; on March 3, 2008, defendant's attorney e-mailed plaintiff's attorney to report that she had been fired and the settlement was dead in the water. See dkts. 11-12.

Today, March 21, 2008, defendant's new attorneys moved for a telephonic status conference so that we could discuss new dates for amending the answer, filing dispositive motions, potential mediation, extension of the discovery deadline, and presumably a new trial date. Plaintiff declined to join this motion. See dkt. 14.

With all respect to defendant's new counsel, they presume too much. Trial is firmly scheduled for May 12, 2008. The deadlines for amending pleadings and dispositive motions passed months ago. A party in a civil lawsuit cannot throw a wrench into the works on the eve of trial by firing her attorney and requesting a mulligan. It isn't going to happen. The court will extend the discovery deadline two weeks at plaintiff's request because plaintiff was sandbagged by defendant's change of position. Otherwise, the equities here require no further action from the court.

It is ORDERED that:

(1) Plaintiff's motion to extend discovery is GRANTED; and

(2) Defendant's motion for a telephonic status conference to reset the schedule is DENIED.