Terrill v. BNSF Railway Company

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California
DecidedOctober 6, 2023
Docket1:23-cv-00611
StatusUnknown

This text of Terrill v. BNSF Railway Company (Terrill v. BNSF Railway Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Terrill v. BNSF Railway Company, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MELISSA TERRILL, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00611-CDB 12 Plaintiffs, SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. 16)

13 v. Discovery Deadlines: 14 BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY, Non-Expert: May 13, 2024 Expert: July 24, 2024 15 Defendant. Mid-Discovery Conf.: April 1, 2024 16 Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 17 Filing: August 8, 2024 Hearing: September 12, 2024 18 Dispositive Motion Deadlines: 19 Filing: October 10, 2024 Hearing: November 21, 2024 20 Pre-Trial Conf.: January 7, 2025 (10:30am) 21 510 19th Street, Bakersfield

22 Trial: March 3, 2025 (8:30am) 510 19th Street, Bakersfield (4-5 days) 23 24 25 Plaintiffs are the successors in interest of Anthony Terrill, Jr. (the Decedent). Plaintiffs aver 26 that the Decedent was struck by a train in or about Bakersfield and died of his injuries. The parties 27 dispute whether the Decedent failed to heed warnings from the train and whether this matter is 28 preempted by the Federal Railroad Safety Act. 1 The parties convened for a scheduling conference on October 4, 2023. Seth O’ Dell appeared 2 on behalf of Plaintiffs. Jason Schaff appeared on behalf of Defendant. 3 I. Fictitiously-Named Defendants 4 All claims as to “Doe” Defendants, including any counterclaims and cross-claims, are hereby 5 Dismissed. 6 II. Pleading Amendment 7 Any motions to amend the pleadings must be filed by December 8, 2023. The parties should 8 not construe a timely filing of a motion or stipulation requesting leave to amend the pleadings to 9 necessarily constitute good cause to modify the existing schedule, if necessary. All proposed 10 amendments must (A) be supported by good cause pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) if the amendment 11 requires any modification to the existing schedule, see Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 12 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992), and (B) establish, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), that such an amendment 13 is not (1) prejudicial to the opposing party, (2) the product of undue delay, (3) proposed in bad faith, or 14 (4) futile. See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 15 III. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Date 16 The parties have exchanged their initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1). 17 The parties are ordered to complete all discovery pertaining to non-experts on or before May 18 13, 2024, and all discovery pertaining to experts on or before July 24, 2024. 19 The parties are directed to disclose all expert witnesses, in writing, on or before May 27, 2024, 20 and to disclose all rebuttal experts on or before June 25, 2024. The written designation of retained 21 and non-retained experts shall be made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 26(a)(2), (A), (B), and (C) and 22 shall include all information required thereunder. Failure to designate experts in compliance with this 23 order may result in the Court excluding the testimony or other evidence offered through such experts 24 that are not disclosed pursuant to this order. 25 The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4) and (5) shall apply to all discovery relating to 26 experts and their opinions. Experts must be fully prepared to be examined on all subjects and opinions 27 included in the designation. Failure to comply may result in the imposition of sanctions, which may 28 include striking the expert designation and preclusion of expert testimony. 1 The provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e) regarding a party’s duty to timely supplement 2 disclosures and responses to discovery requests will be strictly enforced. 3 A mid-discovery status conference is scheduled for April 1, 2024, at 9:30 a.m. before 4 Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker. Counsel SHALL file a joint mid-discovery status conference 5 report no later than one week before the conference. Counsel also SHALL lodge the status report via 6 e-mail to CDBorders@caed.uscourts.gov. The joint status report SHALL outline the discovery 7 counsel have completed and that which needs to be completed as well as any impediments to 8 completing the discovery within the deadlines set forth in this order. Counsel SHALL discuss 9 settlement and certify in the joint status report (1) that they have met/conferred regarding settlement, 10 and (2) proposed dates for convening a settlement conference with an unassigned magistrate judge. 11 IV. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule / Informal Discovery Dispute Conferences 12 All non-dispositive pre-trial motions, including any discovery motions, shall be filed by 13 August 8, 20241 and heard on or before September 12, 2024. For these hearings and at the direction 14 of the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, the Court may direct counsel to appear remotely (via Zoom). For 15 hearings noticed to occur in-person, the Court may permit counsel to appear remotely (via Zoom) 16 provided the Courtroom Deputy Clerk receives a written notice of the request to appear remotely no 17 later than five court days before the noticed hearing date. 18 No motion to amend or stipulation to amend the case schedule will be entertained unless it is 19 filed at least three days before the first deadline the parties wish to extend. 20 No written discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of Magistrate Judge 21 Baker. A party with a discovery dispute must first confer with the opposing party in a good faith 22 effort to resolve by agreement the issues in dispute. If that good faith effort is unsuccessful, the 23 requesting party promptly shall seek a conference with all involved parties and Magistrate Judge 24 Baker. To schedule this conference, the parties should contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk, Susan 25 Hall, at (661) 326-6620 or via email at SHall@caed.uscourts.gov. At least two days before the 26 27 1 Non-dispositive motions related to non-expert discovery SHALL be filed within a reasonable 28 time of discovery of the dispute, but in no event later than 30 days after the expiration of the non-expert discovery deadline. 1 conference, counsel SHALL file a joint, informal letter brief detailing each party’s position. Each 2 party’s narrative shall not exceed three pages, excluding exhibits. At the commencement of the 3 conference, if the parties jointly agree to Magistrate Judge Baker’s consideration and resolution of the 4 discovery disputes outside the formal Local Rule 251 procedures, the Court will entertain arguments 5 by the parties and issue a ruling. If the parties do not jointly agree to the informal discovery dispute 6 resolution procedures set forth herein, the requesting party may then seek relief through motion to 7 compel. Counsel must comply with Local Rule 251 with respect to discovery disputes or the motion 8 will be denied without prejudice and dropped from the Court’s calendar. 9 All dispositive pre-trial motions shall be filed no later than October 10, 2024, and heard on or 10 before November 21, 2024. Motions are heard before Magistrate Judge Baker at 10:30 a.m., at the 11 United States District Courthouse, 510 19th Street, Bakersfield, CA. 12 V.

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

Related

Foman v. Davis
371 U.S. 178 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Crosby v. Heiner
12 F.2d 604 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Terrill v. BNSF Railway Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terrill-v-bnsf-railway-company-caed-2023.