Opinion
Civil Action No. 01-cv-2056-JLK.
December 1, 2009
ORDER
Having reviewed the parties' briefs regarding how best to proceed on remand in light of the Tenth Circuit's opinion vacating the jury's verdict (Docs. 291, 292, 294, 296, 297, and 298), I disagree with Defendants' contention that the Tenth Circuit's ruling on the applicability of Idaho law compels the entry of judgment in Defendants' favor and conclude instead that the case must be set for new trial. A status/scheduling conference, at which a new trial date and dates for related pretrial filings and conferences will be selected, will be set by separate Minute Order. Any hearing/oral argument regarding the need and effect of a Seppi instruction in the retrial is reserved for those ensuing pretrial proceedings.
The Court's docketing clerk yesterday instructed Plaintiffs to refile their Notice/Request for Oral Argument re Jury Instruction (Doc. 297) as a motion, which, given my rulings below, would be moot if filed today and is therefore unnecessary.
In the interim, counsel SHALL CONFER with their clients regarding the relative risks and benefits of retrying this case and the utility/desirability of a referral for settlement. Status Reports setting forth the results of these conferences SHALL BE FILED on or before December 17, 2009.