Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lambert v. Robles

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 2, 2009

JOHN LAMBERT, PLAINTIFF,
v.
L. ROBLES, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Nita L. Stormes U.S. Magistrate Judge

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL AND TRIAL PROCEEDINGS [Doc. No. 21] FIRST AMENDED SCHEDULING AND OTHER PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS ORDER REGULATING DISCOVERY

For good cause shown in Defendant's application, the court GRANTS the ex parte application to continue certain pretrial and trial dates. Accordingly, the court ORDERS:

1. The telephonic Mandatory Settlement Conference currently set for July 7, 2009 with Magistrate Judge Nita L. Stormes is VACATED and RESET for November 16, 2009 at 2:30 pm. Defense counsel shall make arrangements for incarcerated parties to appear telephonically. Counsel or any party representing himself or herself shall submit confidential settlement briefs directly to chambers no later than November 9, 2009. Please see attached settlement conference procedures.

2. All pretrial motions must be filed on or before August 28, 2009.

3. Counsel and unrepresented parties shall comply with the pre-trial disclosure requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3) on or before December 11, 2009.

4. Counsel and unrepresented parties shall meet and take the action required by Local Rule 16.1(f)(4) on or before December 18, 2009.

5. The Proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order, including objections to any other parties' Federal Rule 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures shall be prepared, served and lodged with the Clerk of the Court on or before January 8, 2010, and shall be in the form prescribed in and in compliance with Local Rule 16.1(f)(6).

6. The final Pretrial Conference currently scheduled for August 14, 2009 at 8:30 a.m is VACATED and RESET for January 15, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. on the calendar of Judge Miller. The trial is scheduled to commence on February 16, 2010 at 10:00 a.m.

7. The discovery deadline remains July 27, 2009.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CHAMBERS OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE NITA L. STORMES

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE PROCEDURES

TTENDANCE: All parties, adjusters for insured defendants, and other representatives of a party having full and complete authority to enter into a binding settlement, and the principal attorneys responsible for the litigation, must be present and legally and factually prepared to discuss settlement of the case. Full authority to settle means that the individuals at the settlement conference be authorized to fully explore settlement options and to agree at that time to any settlement terms acceptable to the parties. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648, 653 (7th Cir. 1989). The person needs to have "unfettered discretion and authority" to change the settlement position of a party. Pitman v. Brinker Int'l, 216 F.R.D. 481, 485-486 (D. Ariz. 2003). One of the purposes of requiring a person with unlimited settlement authority to attend the conference is that the person's view of the case may be altered during the face-to-face conference. Pitman, 216 F.R.D. at 486. Limited or sum certain authority is not adequate. Nick v. Morgan's Foods, Inc., 270 F.3d 590, 595-597 (8th Cir. 2001). Failure of any of the aforementioned to appear in person will result in the imposition of sanctions. Where settlement authority rests with a governing body, counsel shall propose special arrangements in advance for securing timely authority to

ETTLEMENT CONFERENCE BRIEFS: All parties are required to lodge a confidential settlement brief three court days prior to the Settlement Conference. Settlement briefs should not exceed ten (10) pages in length, double spaced, exclusive of exhibits, if any. Copies of all documents that might enhance the productivity of negotiations (e.g., contracts, key correspondence or memos, reports of experts, photos, medical bills, wage loss statements, selected pages from deposition transcripts or responses to other discovery) should be attached as exhibits to the settlement briefs with significant portions highlighted for easy reference. Parties may also attach as exhibits helpful judicial opinions and information about the settlement or judgment value of comparable cases.

IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE INFORMATION, EACH BRIEF SHALL SET FORTH AT A MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWING "REQUIRED" CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION:

A brief analysis of the key issues involved in the litigation;

A description of the strongest and weakest legal and factual points in the party's case;

A description of the strongest and weakest legal and factual points in the opponent's case; The status of any settlement negotiations, including the last settlement proposal made by each party; and The settlement proposal that the party is willing to make in order to conclude the matter and spare the further expense of litigation.

Parties should hand deliver, mail or email the original only of settlement briefs directly to chambers. FAX briefs will not be accepted. Briefs must be received in chambers no later than three (3) court days before the Settlement Conference. Settlement briefs are confidential and shall not be served on opposing parties nor shall they be filed with the Clerk of the Court. Briefs submitted by email should be sent to efile_stormes@casd.uscourts.gov, and briefs submitted by mail should be sent to:

Honorable Nita L. Stormes United States Magistrate Judge U.S. Courthouse 940 Front Street, Room 1118 San Diego, California 92101-8921

20090702

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.