Highlander Holdings, Inc. v. Fellner

District Court, S.D. California·Decided August 10, 2020·No. 3:18-cv-01506·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HIGHLANDER HOLDINGS, INC., Case No.: 3:18-cv-1506-AHG-LL

12 Plaintiff, AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 13 v. REGULATING DISCOVERY AND OTHER PRE-TRIAL 14 ANDREW FELLNER, et al., PROCEEDINGS 15 Defendants. 16 17 Following a Case Management Conference (“CMC”), the Court issued the initial 18 Scheduling Order in this case on December 5, 2019. ECF No. 53. Since that time, the 19 parties consented to the undersigned Magistrate Judge to act as the presiding judge in this 20 matter. ECF No. 55. Therefore, the Court must amend the Schedule Order to reset the 21 pretrial deadlines, pretrial conference, and trial before the undersigned. The Court held a 22 second CMC on August 7, 2020 for that purpose. ECF No. 74. 23 Additionally, as outlined in the Court’s order on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel and 24 for Sanctions, both sides failed to timely raise certain disputes with the Court regarding 25 written discovery requests, resulting in minimal discovery in the case. See ECF No. 71. 26 Defendant Andrew Fellner’s deposition has also been significantly delayed due to his 27 refusal to complete his deposition in February 2020, the parties’ delay in bringing the issue 28 to the Court’s attention, and ongoing disagreements between the parties with regard to 1 rescheduling the deposition. See id.; see also ECF No. 73. 2 The Court previously determined that the parties’ failure to timely raise their 3 discovery disputes with the Court resulted in a waiver of their ability to compel further 4 discovery from one another. See ECF No. 71. However, as discussed during the second 5 CMC, the Court now finds it in the best interests of the Court and the parties to permit 6 limited additional discovery to assist the parties in preparing and/or responding to 7 dispositive pretrial motions notwithstanding the parties’ previous lack of diligence in 8 pursuing discovery. In particular, the Court is mindful that Defendant Fellner was 9 previously proceeding pro se, but has now obtained counsel who is new to the case. 10 Accordingly, after consulting with the attorneys of record for the parties and being 11 advised of the status of the case, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 12 1. All fact discovery shall be completed by all parties by November 16, 2020. 13 “Completed” means that all discovery under Rules 30-36 of the Federal Rules of Civil 14 Procedure, and discovery subpoenas under Rule 45, must be initiated a sufficient period of 15 time in advance of the cut-off date, so that it may be completed by the cut-off date, taking 16 into account the times for service, notice and response as set forth in the Federal Rules of 17 Civil Procedure. During this extended fact discovery period, each side shall be limited to 18 one deposition and shall be permitted to serve no more than five Interrogatories and five 19 Requests for Production on the other side. No additional expert discovery will be 20 permitted. 21 2. Counsel shall promptly and in good faith meet and confer with regard to 22 all discovery disputes in compliance with Local Rule 26.1(a). The Court expects counsel 23 to make every effort to resolve all disputes without court intervention through the meet and 24 confer process. If the parties reach an impasse on any discovery issue, counsel shall file an 25 appropriate motion within the time limit and procedures outlined in the undersigned 26 magistrate judge’s chambers rules. A failure to comply in this regard will result in a 27 waiver of a party’s discovery issue. Absent an order of the court, no stipulation 28 continuing or altering this requirement will be recognized by the court. A failure to 1 comply in this regard will result in a waiver of a party’s discovery issue. Absent an 2 order of the court, no stipulation continuing or altering this requirement will be 3 recognized by the court. The Court expects counsel to make every effort to resolve all 4 disputes without court intervention through the meet and confer process. If the parties 5 reach an impasse on any discovery issue, the movant must e-mail chambers at 6 efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov no later than 45 days after the date of service of the 7 written discovery response that is in dispute, seeking a telephonic conference with the 8 Court to discuss the discovery dispute. The email must include: (1) at least three proposed 9 times mutually agreed upon by the parties for the telephonic conference; (2) a neutral 10 statement of the dispute; and (3) one sentence describing (not arguing) each parties’ 11 position. The movant must copy opposing counsel on the email. No discovery motion may 12 be filed until the Court has conducted its pre-motion telephonic conference, unless the 13 movant has obtained leave of Court. All parties are ordered to read and to fully comply 14 with the Chambers Rules of Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. 15 3. Failure to comply with this section or any other discovery order of the court 16 may result in the sanctions provided for in Fed. R. Civ. P. 37. 17 4. All dispositive pretrial motions must be filed by January 22, 2021. Counsel 18 for the moving party must obtain a motion hearing date from the law clerk of the judge 19 who will hear the motion. Failure to make a timely request for a motion date may result in 20 the motion not being heard. 21 5. A Mandatory Settlement Conference shall be conducted on January 13, 2021 22 at 10:00 AM in the chambers of Magistrate Judge Linda Lopez located at 221 West 23 Broadway, Suite 2140, San Diego, CA 92101. All discussions at the Mandatory 24 Settlement Conference will be informal, off the record, privileged, and confidential. 25 Counsel for any non-English speaking party is responsible for arranging for the appearance 26 of an interpreter at the conference. 27 a. Personal Appearance of Parties Required: All parties, adjusters for insured 28 defendants, and other representatives of a party having full and complete authority to enter 1 into a binding settlement, as well as the principal attorneys responsible for the litigation, 2 must be present in person and legally and factually prepared to discuss settlement of the 3 case. Counsel appearing without their clients (whether or not counsel has been given 4 settlement authority) will be cause for immediate imposition of sanctions and may also 5 result in the immediate termination of the conference. 6 Unless there is good cause, persons required to attend the conference pursuant to this 7 Order shall not be excused from personal attendance. Requests for excuse from attendance 8 for good cause shall be made in writing at least three (3) court days prior to the conference. 9 Failure to appear in person at the Mandatory Settlement Conference will be grounds for 10 sanctions. 11 b. Full Settlement Authority Required: In addition to counsel who will try the 12 case, a party or party representative with full settlement authority1 must be present for the 13 conference. In the case of a corporate entity, an authorized representative of the 14 corporation who is not retained outside counsel must be present and must have 15 discretionary authority to commit the company to pay an amount up to the amount of 16 Plaintiff’s prayer (excluding punitive damages prayers). The purpose of this requirement 17 is to have representatives present who can settle the case during the course of the 18 conference without consulting a superior. Counsel for a government entity may be excused 19 from this requirement so long as the government attorney who attends the Mandatory 20 Settlement Conference (1) has primary responsibility for handling the case, and (2) may 21

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Highlander Holdings, Inc. v. Fellner, (S.D. Cal. 2020).

Highlander Holdings, Inc. v. Fellner (Highlander Holdings, Inc. v. Fellner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related