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.

Jacob Winding v. Allstate Insurance Co. and Does 1-25

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 7, 2012

JACOB WINDING, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO. AND DOES 1-25, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on defendant, Allstate Insurance Company's ("defendant"), motion to reopen discovery.*fn1 Plaintiff does not oppose the motion. For the reasons set forth below, defendant's motion is granted.*fn2

The court conducted a final pretrial conference on March 1, 2012. The court, on March 9, 2012, issued a pretrial order. (ECF 126.) In that order, the court held that, "[r]egarding defendant's motion in limine No. 2 (ECF 117) to exclude all testimony at trial by those witnesses designated by plaintiff on his expert witness list (ECF 83), the court grants plaintiff 30 days to provide defendant the information required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) as it relates to each proffered expert witness." (ECF 126 at 2:1-4.) On April 11, 2012, the court granted plaintiff a 60-day extension to provide the necessary disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). (ECF 131.) Defendant filed its motion to reopen discovery on May 1, 2012.

"The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation, and its decisions regarding the preclusive effect of a pretrial order[.]" Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992). A moving party must, however, demonstrate good cause to modify a scheduling order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); see Zivkovic v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir.2002). Here, the court finds that good cause exists to grant defendant's request to reopen discovery. Without the opportunity to depose those witnesses plaintiff intends to disclose, defendant would be genuinely prejudiced at trial. Indeed, at the final pretrial conference, the court intimated that it would be willing to reopen discovery for the limited purpose of deposing those witnesses plaintiff failed to properly disclose. (ECF 132 at 4:24-5:13.) As such, defendant's motion to reopen discovery for 90 days is granted. Discovery will close 90 days after this order issues.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.