Tumbling v. Merced Irrigation District
Filing
93
STIPULATION and ORDER TO EXTEND EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINE RE PLAINTIFF'S TREATING PHYSICIANS. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 5/12/2010. (Hernandez, M)
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Daley & Heft, LLP Attorneys at Law Neal S. Meyers, Esq. (SBN 109625) Matthew T. Racine, Esq. (SBN 256865) 462 Stevens Avenue, Suite 201 Solana Beach, CA 92075 Telephone: (858) 755-5666 Facsimile: (858) 755-7870 Attorneys for Defendant, MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT Lawrence D. Murray (SBN 77536) MURRAY & ASSOCIATES 1781 Union Street San Francisco, CA 94123 Tel: (415) 673-0555 Fax: (415) 928-4084 Dean Gordon (SBN 61311) LAW OFFICES OF DEAN GORDON 1220 East Olive Avenue Fresno, CA 93728 Tel: (559) 221-7777 Fax: (559) 221-5812 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LAMONTE TUMBLING UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION LAMONTE TUMBLING, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT, a ) public entity ) ) Defendant. ) ) Case No. 1:08-CV-01801-LJO-DLB JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINE RE PLAINTIFF'S TREATING PHYSICIANS JUDGE: Lawrence J. O'Neill COURTROOM: 9 MAGISTRATE: Dennis L. Beck
Merced Irrigation District ("Defendant") and LaMonte Tumbling ("Plaintiff"), by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to and request the Court enter a scheduling order revising the amended scheduling order entered by this court on December 4, 2009. (Document 48). ///
1 T u m b lin g v. Merced Irrigation District USDC, East Dist Cal J O I N T STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINE R E PLAINTIFF'S TREATING PHYSICIANS; ORDER Page 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
The parties stipulate to extending the deadline for expert discovery to permit Defendant to depose the treating physicians identified by Plaintiff in his expert disclosures. (See Exhibit A.) The current deadline for expert discovery is May 14, 2010. In light of the fact that Defendant moved to strike Plaintiff's designation of his treating physicians and that motion was not resolved by the Court until its order of May 7, 2010 (Document 91), the parties agree that Defendant needs additional time to schedule and take the depositions of Plaintiff's three treating physicians. Therefore, the parties stipulate to extending the expert discovery deadline by thirty days for the sole purpose of conducting discovery involving plaintiff's designated treating physicians from the current deadline of May 14, 2010, to June 14, 2010. Although defendant hopes to complete the depositions of these physicians prior to May 31, 2010, given the past struggles of the parties to find dates on which counsel for both parties are available for deposition, the parties believe that an extension of thirty days is more likely to allow successful scheduling of these depositions. Respectfully Submitted, Dated: May 11, 2010 Daley & Heft, LLP By: /s/ Neal S. Meyers, Esq. Neal S. Meyers Matthew T. Racine Attorneys for Defendant, Merced Irrigation District
Dated: May 11, 2010
Murray & Associates By: /s/ Lawrence D. Murray, Esq. Lawrence D. Murray Attorneys for Plaintiff, LaMonte Tumbling
2 T u m b lin g v. Merced Irrigation District USDC, East Dist Cal J O I N T STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINE R E PLAINTIFF'S TREATING PHYSICIANS; ORDER Page 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
ORDER ON STIPULATION FOR ORDER HAVING READ AND CONSIDERED THE FOREGOING, and good cause appearing: The foregoing is the order of the court. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 3b142a
May 12, 2010
/s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
3 T u m b lin g v. Merced Irrigation District USDC, East Dist Cal J O I N T STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINE R E PLAINTIFF'S TREATING PHYSICIANS; ORDER Page 3
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
