Lang v. Parsons et al, No. 2:2017cv17149 - Document 9 (E.D. La. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS denying 8 Motion to Continue Trial. Signed by Judge Sarah S. Vance on 8/21/2018. (cg)

Download PDF
Lang v. Parsons et al Doc. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA J OHN LANG CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 17-17149 TIMOTHY PARSONS, ET AL. SECTION “R” (1) ORD ER AN D REASON S Before the Court is the parties’ joint m otion to continue trial. 1 The Court denies the motion. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule m ay be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The “good cause standard requires the party seeking relief to show that the deadlines cannot reasonably be m et despite the diligence of the party needing the extension.” S & W Enter., LLC. v. SouthTrust Bank of Ala., N A, 315 F.3d 533, 535 (5th Cir. 20 0 3) (internal citations om itted). Whether to grant or deny a continuance is within the sound discretion of the trial court. United States v. Alix, 86 F.3d 429, 434 (5th Cir. 1996). In deciding whether to grant a continuance, the Court’s “judgm ent range is exceedingly wide,” for it “m ust consider not only the facts of the particular case but also 1 R. Doc. 8. Dockets.Justia.com all of the dem ands on counsel’s tim e and the court’s.” Streber v. Hunter, 221 F.3d 70 1, 736 (5th Cir. 20 0 0 ) (quoting HC Gun & Knife Show s, Inc. v. City of Houston, 20 1 F.3d 544, 549-50 (5th Cir. 20 0 0 )). The parties seek a continuance because plaintiff was recently advised that he may need an additional surgery on his shoulder, which he allegedly injured during the incident that gave rise to this litigation. 2 The parties have not provided “good cause” for a continuance because their m otion is m erely speculative about whether plaintiff will need a second surgery that requires substantial additional discovery. And if m ore discovery is needed after the expert disclosure and discovery deadlines have passed, there are other avenues for relief available to the parties short of a continuance. For the foregoing reasons, the parties’ joint m otion is DENIED. New Orleans, Louisiana, this _ _21st _ _ _ day of August, 20 18. _____________________ SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT J UDGE 2 R. Doc. 8-1 at 1. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.