Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United Steel Erectors, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of

June 5, 2012

UNITED STEEL ERECTORS, INC.
v.
TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Joseph N. Laplante United States District Judge

ORDER AFTER PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in chambers on June 1, 2012.

The Discovery Plan (document no. 9) is approved as submitted, with the following changes:

* Expert deposition deadline - December 31, 2012

* Jury trial - June, 2013

Based on the discussions between the court and counsel at the conference, the following are stricken without prejudice to being reinstated on request if warranted by the evidence:

* the following affirmative defenses: The laches defense set forth in ¶34 of the Answer; the defense set forth in ¶39 of the Answer.

The defendant will amend ¶¶5-6, 12-22, and 25 of its Answer by June 15, 2012, to substantively respond to the corresponding allegations of the Complaint.

Summary Judgment. The parties and counsel are advised that compliance with Rule 56(e) and Local Rule 7.2(b), regarding evidentiary support for factual assertions, and specification and delineation of material issues of disputed fact, will be required.

Discovery disputes. Discovery disputes will be handled by the undersigned judge, as opposed to the Magistrate Judge, in the normal course. No motion to compel is necessary. The party or counsel seeking discovery-related relief should confer with adverse counsel to choose mutually available dates, and then contact the Deputy Clerk to schedule a conference call with the court. The court will inform counsel and parties what written materials, if any, should be submitted in advance of the conference call.

Customary motions to compel discovery, while disfavored by the undersigned judge, are nonetheless permissible. If counsel prefer traditional discovery litigation to the conference call procedure set forth above, any such motion to compel should expressly request, in the title of the motion, a referral to the United States Magistrate Judge. Such referral requests will normally be granted. If the Magistrate Judge is recused, alternate arrangements will be made.

SO ORDERED.

cc:

20120605 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.