Opinion
NO. CIV. S-06-2126 LKK/KJM.
October 15, 2008
ORDER
Pending before the court is plaintiff's objection to defendant's notice of errata regarding her Motion in Limine No. 10. All motions in limine were ordered to be filed in July 2008 and set for hearing on September 22, 2008. The court subsequently continued the hearing to February 9, 2008.
On October 9, 2008, defendant filed a Notice of Errata regarding her Motion in Limine No. 10 and filed the corrected version of Motion in Limine No. 10. As plaintiff observes, these filings seek to remedy defendant's failure to actually file Motion in Limine No. 10 in July, as defendant had filed no Motion in Limine No. 10 but had filed Motion in Limine No. 11 twice. Plaintiff objects to defendant's attempt to file the motion now.
While it is essential for the parties to adhere to the scheduling orders issued by the court, defendant's failure to timely file Motion in Limine No. 10 appears to be an honest oversight. Because the hearing on the motion has been continued to February 2009, the parties will have ample time to brief the motion, allowing the court to resolve the issue raised therein on its merits which serves the interests of justice. Accordingly, plaintiff's objection is OVERRULED. Plaintiff's opposition or statement of non-opposition and defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed in accordance with the deadlines stated in Local Rule 78-230(c)-(d).
IT IS SO ORDERED.