Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Johnson v. Lundquist

November 9, 2010

SCOTT N. JOHNSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOAN LUNDQUIST, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A LAZY S LODGE AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE JOAN LUNDQUIST REVOCABLE TRUST DATED NOVEMBER 23, 2005, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge

STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

ORDER

The status (pretrial scheduling) conference scheduled for November 15, 2010, is vacated since the parties' Joint Status Report filed on October 20, 2010 ("JSR") indicates that the following Order should issue.

SERVICE, JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL PARTIES, AMENDMENT

No further service, joinder of parties or amendments to pleadings is permitted, except with leave of Court for good cause shown.

DISCOVERY

All discovery shall be completed by December 6, 2011. In this context, "completed" means that all discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate orders, if necessary, and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been complied with or, alternatively, the time allowed for such compliance shall have expired.

Each party shall comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(c)(i)'s initial expert witness disclosure requirements on or before July 6, 2011, and any contradictory and/or rebuttal expert disclosure authorized under Rule 26(a)(2)(c)(ii) on or before August 5, 2011.

MOTION HEARING SCHEDULE

The last hearing date for motions shall be February 6, 2012, at 9:00 a.m.*fn1

Motions shall be filed in accordance with Local Rule 230(b). Opposition papers shall be filed in accordance with Local Rule 230(c). Failure to comply with this local rule may be deemed consent to the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily. Brydges v. Lewis, 18 F.3d 651, 652-53 (9th Cir. 1994). Further, failure to timely oppose a summary judgment motion may result in the granting of that motion if the movant shifts the burden to the non-movant to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact remains for trial. Cf. Marshall v. Gates, 44 F.3d 722 (9th Cir. 1995).

The parties are cautioned that an untimely motion characterized as a motion in limine may be summarily denied. A motion in limine addresses the admissibility of evidence.

FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

The final pretrial conference is set for April 16, 2012, at 11:30 a.m. The parties are cautioned that the lead attorney who WILL TRY THE CASE for each party shall attend the final pretrial conference. In addition, all persons representing themselves and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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