Christie v. State of Washington Department of Corrections
This text of Christie v. State of Washington Department of Corrections (Christie v. State of Washington Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 8 TRINA CHRISTIE, in her Personal Capacity 9 and as Personal Representative of the Estate of NO. 3:22-cv-05692-TMC ANTHONY R. CHRISTIE, deceased; C.C., a 10 minor, in his personal capacity, SECOND STIPULATED MOTION TO CONTINUE CERTAIN PRE-TRIAL 11 Plaintiffs, DEADLINES AND ORDER
12 v. NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: MARCH 4, 2024 13 STATE OF WASHINGTON, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; JULIE MARTIN; ROB 14 HERZOG; KEVIN BOVENCAMP; MARY JO CURREY; JACK WARNER; CHRISTOPHER 15 HALLGREN; STEFAN ROSE; KODY ANGELL; JOHN GEISLER; RADU 16 MURESAN; WILLIAM HALL; DIANNA MULL; ARBEN KULLOJKA; VALARIE 17 HERRINGTON; TROY BUSHEY; AREIG AWAD; JACOB MILLER; ELAINE 18 GRAVATT; and JOHN DOES 1-20,
19 Defendants. 20 I. STIPULATION 21 For good cause shown and pursuant to Federal and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(6), 22 all Parties to this matter respectfully and jointly move the Court for entry of an order striking the 23 previously set pretrial dates, to be reset, while maintaining the existing trial date. 24 25 2 deadlines in the scheduling order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); see also LCR 16(b)(6). The “good
3 cause” standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment—the court 4 may modify the pretrial schedule if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the 5 parties seeking the extension. See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th 6 Cir. 1992) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee’s notes (1983 amendment)). Although 7 the existence or degree of prejudice to the opposing party might supply additional considerations 8 for a motion to modify, the focus remains on the moving party’s reasons for seeking 9 modification. Id. at 609. 10 For good cause shown and pursuant to the Court’s Scheduling Order (Dkt. #33) and the 11 Order Setting Jury Trial and Pretrial Dates (Dkt. 51), all parties to this matter stipulate as follows:
12 1. As of the date of this stipulated motion, six depositions have been taken, written 13 discovery has been exchanged, a stipulated Protective Order has been entered, and the production 14 of responses and documentary materials is underway. Additional depositions are scheduled and 15 pending scheduling, with an understanding that depositions will be substantially completed by the 16 end of March 2024. 17 2. Under the current case schedule, expert disclosures are due on March 11, 2024, and 18 the discovery cutoff is May 17, 2024. While discovery is proceeding, it has been slowed by both 19 parties’ active and heavy trial schedules. There also exists a need for additional and continued 20 discovery and the experts in this matter will need additional time to complete their reports. 21 3. Extending the expert disclosure deadline will make it difficult to maintain the
22 remaining dates on the case schedule order, including the completion of discovery, expert-related 23 motions, and the ability to evaluate the case for potential pretrial mediation. 24 4. The Parties, having consulted about their schedules to determine mutual 25 2 schedule as follows:
3 EVENT CURRENT DEADLINE NEW DEADLINE 4 Expert Disclosures March 11, 2024 April 19, 2024 5 Rebuttal Expert Disclosures April 8, 2024 May 8, 2024 6 All motions related to April 19, 2024 May 24, 2024 discovery must be filed by 7 Discovery Deadline May 17, 2024 June 7, 2024 8 5. By so stipulating, neither Plaintiff nor Defendants consent to discovery above or 9 beyond those permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or this Court’s Local Rules. Based 10 upon the stipulation and agreements set forth above, the parties stipulate to the filing of the Agreed 11 Order below. 12 IT IS SO STIPULATED THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 13 DATED this 6th day of March, 2024. 14 GALANDA BROADMAN, PLLC 15 I certify that this memorandum contains 514 words, in compliance with the Local 16 Civil Rules.
17 s/ Ryan D. Dreveskracht Ryan D. Dreveskracht, WSBA #42593 18 R. Joseph Sexton, WSBA #38063 Rachel R. Tobias, WSBA #34111 19 8606 35th Avenue NE, Suite L1 P.O. Box 15146 20 Seattle, WA 98115 Phone: (206) 557-7509 21 Fax: (206) 299-7690 Email: ryan@galandabroadman.com 22 joe@galandabroadman.com rtobias@galandabroadman.com 23 Attorneys for Plaintiff 24
25 Attorney General 2 Approved as to form via email
3 s/Miles F. Russell MILES F. RUSSELL 4 WSBA No. 46968; OID No. 91105 Assistant Attorneys General 5 Torts Division 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000 6 Seattle, WA 98104-31880 Attorneys for Defendants 7 Email: Milesf.russell@atg.wa.gov
8 Attorneys for Defendants
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 Pursuant to the Stipulation above, the Court orders that the deadlines be extended to
3 reflect the following dates, as agreed by the Parties: 4 EVENT NEW DEADLINE 5 Expert Disclosures April 19, 2024 6 Rebuttal Expert Disclosures May 8, 2024 7 All motions related to discovery must be filed by May 24, 2024 8 Discovery Deadline June 7, 2024 9 10 DATED this 6th day of March, 2024. 11 A 12 Tiffany M. Cartwright 13 United States District Judge
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Christie v. State of Washington Department of Corrections, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christie-v-state-of-washington-department-of-corrections-wawd-2024.