Sherman v. Public Employees Retirement System

District Court, S.D. Ohio·Decided October 10, 2023·No. 2:22-cv-04161·Unknown

Opinion

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

WENDY SHERMAN,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:22-cv-4161 JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. v. Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER SETTING TRIAL DATE AND SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Amend/Correct Case Schedule (ECF No. 29) and Defendants’ Motion for a Status Conference (ECF No. 27). Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED to the extent it seeks modification of the current case schedule, and DENIED to the extent it requests a status conference and proposes specific dates for pending deadlines. Defendants’ motion is GRANTED to the extent it seeks modification of the current case schedule, and DENIED to the extent it requests a status conference. The Court hereby extends the current deadlines. Below is the new summary of the schedule. Further explanations and instructions are found in the body of this Order. Summary: 12/5/2023 Close of Discovery 1/5/2024 Dispositive motions and Daubert motions deadline. 4/2/2024 Confidential assessment for Settlement Conference due.

4/9/2024 at 9:30 a.m. Settlement Conference before the Court.

4/15/2024 Statement of witnesses, designations of deposition portions, and exhibit lists due. If jury trial proposed case-specific jury instructions to be served on opposing counsel. 4/29/2024 Memoranda in opposition to motions in limine and objections to case-specific jury instructions due.

5/6/2024 Final pretrial order and general areas for voir dire questions due.

5/10/2024 at 9:00 a.m. Final Pretrial Conference.

5/20/2024 at 9:00 a.m. Trial: voir dire; opening statements; presentation of evidence.

A. Trial Date.

This matter is set for a Final Pretrial Conference and Trial. Voir dire will begin on the morning of the date set for trial, with the trial immediately following.1 The Court will not continue the trial date except upon written motion supported by an affidavit demonstrating exceptional circumstances, made immediately upon the party’s or counsel’s receipt of notice of the existence of the exceptional circumstances. The Court uses a trailing docket, setting three to five civil cases to begin on the same day. Cases are tried in the order they were filed. If a case set for the same day goes to trial, then the parties and counsel in the next case shall remain prepared to go to trial on a standby basis for a period of two weeks unless the Court orders otherwise. Under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161-3174, and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 50(a), the Court will give preference to any criminal matters it has set to take place the same time as the trial in this case.

1 Provisions concerning voir dire and jury instructions do not apply in non-jury cases. Counsel shall inform the Court immediately if this is a non-jury case or if there is a controversy concerning whether a jury trial is required or permitted. 2 This case is set for a Settlement Conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(a)(5) and (c)(2)(I) before The Honorable Edmund A. Sargus, Jr., at the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, 85 Marconi Boulevard, Room 301, Columbus, Ohio 43215. Counsel and the parties shall adhere to the following with respect to the Settlement Conference: (1) The trial attorney for each party must attend the conference.

(2) The parties or principals with settlement authority shall be present. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(c).

(3) Lack of discovery will not excuse active participation in the conference.2

(4) No later than fourteen (14) days before the conference, each plaintiff must submit to counsel for all opposing parties a fully documented, written settlement demand; and

(5) No later than ten (10) days before the conference, each opposing party must respond, in writing, to each settlement demand fully documenting that party’s position.

(6) On the date set out above, each party shall submit directly and only to Chambers a letter (confidential assessment), not to exceed three pages, (a) explaining the party’s theory of the case, (b) indicating its position on settlement (in monetary terms, if applicable), and (c) setting forth all conditions necessary to achieve settlement (including non-monetary terms). The Confidential Assessment letter should be submitted by email to Sargus_Chambers@ohsd.uscourts.gov.

(7) Before the conference, counsel shall discuss with their clients whether this case would be appropriate for a summary jury trial or some other form of alternative dispute resolution. S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 16.3.

2 If the parties have requested extensions of time in which to file memoranda for dispositive motions, the fact that the Court has not yet ruled on the pending motions will not excuse active participation in settlement. 3 Judicial Assistant, Christin Werner, or Career Law Clerk, Lauren Hilsheimer, at (614) 719-3240.

C. Expert Witnesses. Motions directed at expert witnesses shall be filed on the same date as dispositive motions. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 589 (1993); Fed. R. Evid. 702. D. Statement of Witnesses. The parties shall submit to the Court, and serve on opposing counsel, the names, addresses, and occupations of all witnesses they intend to call at trial, with a brief summary of the witness’ testimony (two to three sentences), the purpose of that testimony, and the major issue about which the witness will testify. Failure to list a witness, except upon a showing of good cause, will preclude the use of that witness at trial. The witness lists shall comport with all

of the requirements of Rule 26(a)(3)(A). E. Depositions. The parties shall submit to the Court, and serve on opposing counsel, the designations of any portions of depositions they intend to offer as evidence at trial.1 Failure to make a designation, except upon a showing of a good cause, will preclude the use of the undesignated portion of a deposition at trial. The designation of deposition portions shall comport with all of the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3). F. Exhibits. The parties shall mark their documentary or physical evidence in advance of trial. Each party shall exchange and file a list containing a brief description of each item of documentary or

3 Do not designate portions to be used only for impeachment on cross-examination. 4 comport with all of the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3)(A).

The parties shall attempt to agree on the authenticity and admissibility of documents. Those documents the parties agree should be presented as evidence shall be marked as Joint Exhibits. The Court strongly encourages the parties to utilize the electronic courtroom technology for presentation of evidence. The parties shall report to the Court, by joint submission, on or before the date of the Settlement Conference, their intent to use the technology. In all cases, the parties are required to submit to the Court one (1) copy of exhibits in a three-ringed, tabbed notebook.

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

Sherman v. Public Employees Retirement System, (S.D. Ohio 2023).

Sherman v. Public Employees Retirement System (Sherman v. Public Employees Retirement System) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (Supreme Court, 1993)