Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02151-CMA-KMT
01-06-2012
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
FTR - Courtroom C-201
Deputy Clerk, Nick Richards
Bradley Aaron Levin
Zachary C. Warzel
Nelson Andrew Waneka
Jane E. Young
Mimi Tatum
COURTROOM MINUTES / MINUTE ORDER
MOTION HEARING
Court in session: 10:02 a.m.
Court calls case. Appearances of counsel. Motion Hearing is called regarding Plaintiff's F.R.C.P. 56(d) Motion Requesting Denial of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #16) Without Prejudice or, Alternatively, an Extension of Time to Respond in Order to Conduct Necessary Discovery [Doc. No. 18, filed December 1, 2011] and Defendants' Motion to Bifurcate and for Protective Order to Stay Discovery of Plaintiff's Claims Until Resolution of the Duty to Defend [Doc. No. 25, filed December 19, 2011]. Oral argument by plaintiff. Oral argument by defendant. It is ORDERED:
Plaintiff's Motion Requesting Denial of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #16) Without Prejudice or, Alternatively, an Extension of Time [18] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as stated on the record.It is ORDERED:
Written Discovery consistent with the matters discussed at this hearing shall be served on or before February 20, 2012. Plaintiff's
will be allowed no more than an additional 10 interrogatories, 5 requests for production of documents, 10 requests for admissions, 1 Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, and 2 fact witness depositions pursuant to this limited discovery. No discovery other than discovery directly addressing the duty to defend and the four corners review shall be under taken.
Plaintiff's responses to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 16, filed November 15, 2011] shall be due on or before March 5, 2012. Defendant's reply will be filed in normal course. Discovery is STAYED on underlying issues such as bad faith until District Judge Christine M. Arguello rules on the Motion for Summary Judgment [16] and Plaintiff's Motion to Certify Question of Law [Doc. No. 17, filed December 1, 2011].
Defendant's Motion to Bifurcate and for Protective Order [25] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion for protective order is granted as to a discovery stay on the merits of the independent contractor issue. The motion is denied as to bifurcation for reasons stated on the record.
Court in Recess: 11:25 a.m.
Hearing concluded. Total In-Court Time 01:23 *To obtain a transcript of this proceeding, please contact Avery Woods Reporting at (303) 825-6119.