Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00044/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00044-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jim Langan,

Plaintiff,

v.

Town of Cave Creek,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-0044-PHX-SMM

RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER

On November 14, 2006, a Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in open Court

pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Prior to the conference, the

parties filed a Rule 26(f) Case Management Plan. Pursuant to the terms of the Case

Management Plan, and the representations made by the parties at the Rule 16 Preliminary

Pretrial Conference, all parties are hereby ordered to comply with the deadlines established

in this Order.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the current provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure shall apply to all proceedings concerning this case. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all Initial Disclosures as defined in Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 26(a), if not already exchanged prior to the time of this Preliminary

Pretrial Conference, shall be made no later than five (5) days after date of entry of this

Order or, in the alternative, no later than Friday, January 5, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-00044-SMM Document 30 Filed 12/22/06 Page 1 of 7
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

 1 The parties are hereby given notice that this Order requires disclosure greater than that

required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2).

- 2 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that to satisfy the requirements of Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 26(a), the parties shall file with the Clerk of the Court a Notice of Initial

Disclosure, rather than copies of the actual disclosures.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any amendment to the Complaint shall be filed

no later than N/A. Any amendment to the Answer shall be filed no later than N/A.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff(s) shall disclose the identity of any

person who may be used at trial to present evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 701,

702, 703, 704, and 705 no later than March 9, 2007 .1

 The Defendant(s) shall disclose the

identity of any person who may be used at trial to present evidence under Federal Rules of

Evidence 701, 702, 703, 704, or 705 no later than April 6, 2007. Rebuttal experts if any,

shall be disclosed no later than May 4, 2007. No deposition of any expert witnesses shall

occur before the disclosures concerning expert witnesses mandated by this Order are made.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the disclosures of the identities of any persons

who may be used at trial to present evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 701, 702, 703,

704, or 705 shall also include all of the disclosures required by Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) if the witness is either (1) retained or specifically employed to provide

expert testimony in the case, or (2) is an agent or employee of the party offering the

testimony whose duties regularly involve giving expert testimony.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all discovery, including depositions of parties,

witnesses, and experts, answers to interrogatories, and supplements to interrogatories must

be completed by May 11, 2007. In no event, however, shall this provision alter the duties

and obligations imposed upon the parties by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e). This

Order contemplates that each party will conduct discovery in such a manner as to complete,

within the deadline, any and all discovery. "Last minute" or "eleventh hour" discovery which

results in insufficient time to undertake additional discovery and which requires an extension

Case 2:06-cv-00044-SMM Document 30 Filed 12/22/06 Page 2 of 7
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

 2 The Court finds that a presumptive limit of four (4) hours is sufficient for

depositions in a standard track civil case.

- 3 -

of the discovery deadline will be met with disfavor, and could result in denial of an

extension, exclusion of evidence, or the imposition of other sanctions.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that depositions shall be limited as provided by Rules

30 and 31 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure unless the parties otherwise stipulate in

writing when permitted to do so pursuant to the Rules or when granted permission to depart

from the provisions of the Rules by Order of this Court. Notwithstanding any provision in

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules, the parties shall conduct no more

than 10 depositions. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(d)(2)

that there shall be a time limit of 4 hours2

 to conduct a deposition of any witness in this case.

Additional time shall be allowed where the deponent or a party impedes or delays the

examination. This time limit may only be extended by Order of this Court upon motion of

any party that demonstrates good cause for doing so. Counsel shall conduct themselves

courteously and professionally, especially during the taking of depositions. Any objections

made during the course of a deposition must be in accordance with Rule 26(d)(1) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notwithstanding any provisions of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure or any other provisions of this Order, non-party witnesses shall not

be permitted to attend, either physically, electronically, or otherwise, the deposition of any

other witness in this case without an Order of this Court to the contrary.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that discovery by interrogatory shall generally be

governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33. However, notwithstanding Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 33, there is a limit of 40 interrogatories, including discrete subparts,

applicable to this case. 

Case 2:06-cv-00044-SMM Document 30 Filed 12/22/06 Page 3 of 7
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

- 4 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that requests for admissions shall be governed by

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36. The parties shall serve no more than 25 requests for

admissions.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED reminding counsel of their duty under Rule 26(e) of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to supplement all Rule 26(a) disclosures and responses

to discovery requests. Pursuant to Rule 26(e)(1), any additions or other changes to

information previously disclosed must be made prior to the time that Rule 26(a)(3) Pretrial

Disclosures are due. Since this Court effectively requires all Rule 26(a)(3) Pretrial

Disclosures to be contained in the Proposed Final Pretrial Order, this Order contemplates that

all exhibits and witnesses that may be offered at trial will have been disclosed before the

close of discovery as established by the provisions of this Order. This Order therefore

supersedes the "thirty-day before trial" disclosure deadline contained in that Rule. Therefore

(1) failure to have timely supplemented a Rule 26(a) disclosure, including but not limited to

witnesses and exhibits, or (2) a failure to have timely supplemented responses to any valid

discovery requests, or (3) attempting to include any witnesses or exhibits in the Proposed

Final Pretrial Order that were not previously disclosed in a timely manner as to allow for

meaningful discovery prior to the discovery cutoff date as established by this Order, may

result in the exclusion of such evidence at trial or the imposition of other sanctions. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in the event of a discovery dispute, the parties

shall contact the Court to request a telephonic conference prior to filing any discovery

motions. The parties shall not contact the Court regarding a discovery dispute unless they

have been unable to resolve the dispute themselves, despite personal consultation and sincere

efforts to do so. The parties shall not file any written materials related to a discovery dispute

or discovery motion without express leave of Court. If the Court does order written

submissions, the movant shall include a statement certifying that counsel could not

satisfactorily resolve the matter despite personal consultation and sincere efforts to do so, in

accordance with LRCiv 7.2(j) of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for

the District of Arizona. 

Case 2:06-cv-00044-SMM Document 30 Filed 12/22/06 Page 4 of 7
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

- 5 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all dispositive motions shall be filed no later than

June 15, 2007. Such motions must be, in all respects, in full compliance with the Rules of

Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no submissions to the Court shall contain any

footnotes in excess of five (5) lines.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all parties are hereby specifically admonished that

failure to respond to a motion by serving and filing an answering memorandum within the

time period expressly provided for in LRCiv 7.2 of the Rules of Practice of the United States

District Court for the District of Arizona may be deemed a consent to the denial or granting

of the motion and the Court may then dispose of the motion summarily.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall not notice oral argument on any

motion. Instead, a party desiring oral argument on a motion shall request argument by

placing “Oral Argument Requested” immediately below the title of such motion, pursuant

to LRCiv 7.2(f) of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District

of Arizona. The Court will then issue a minute order scheduling the oral argument.

Oral argument shall be scheduled at the request of a party on all motions to dismiss

and motions for summary judgment. On all other motions on which a party requests oral

argument, the Court will determine whether oral argument is necessary. FURTHER, THE

PARTIES ARE REMINDED THAT OBTAINING A HEARING DATE IS PURELY

ADMINISTRATIVE. ACCORDINGLY, REGARDLESS OF A HEARING DATE, THE

COURT MAY, AT ANY TIME AFTER THE MOTION IS FULLY BRIEFED,

DETERMINE THAT A HEARING IS UNWARRANTED AND RULE ON THE MOTION

WITHOUT ORAL ARGUMENT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any and all motions, requests, or stipulations for

extensions of time shall be made in accordance with the provisions of LRCiv 7.3 of the Rules

of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Notwithstanding

this directive, however, if such a motion, request, or stipulation seeks an extension of time

in which to file a memorandum in response or in reply to a motion previously noticed for oral

Case 2:06-cv-00044-SMM Document 30 Filed 12/22/06 Page 5 of 7
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

- 6 -

argument, under no circumstances shall such a motion, request, or stipulation seek an

extension that would preclude the Court from having at least thirty (30) days from the due

date for the filing of the reply memorandum to consider the merits of the underlying motion

unless the motion, request, or stipulation also seeks to vacate and reschedule the oral

argument. Any motion, request, or stipulation that so seeks both an extension of time and

rescheduling of a hearing shall contain a memorandum of points and authorities which

demonstrates good cause for the Court to grant the requested extension.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if no dispositive motions are pending before the

Court after the dispositive motions deadline has passed, Plaintiff(s) shall file a Notice of

Readiness for Order Re: Final Pretrial Conference within ten (10) days of the dispositive

motions deadline. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if dispositive motions are pending before the

Court following the dispositive motions deadline, the Court will issue an Order Re: Final

Pretrial Conference following its resolution of the dispositive motions, if necessary. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Order Re: Final Pretrial Conference shall: 1)

set deadlines for the filing of and response to motions in limine; 2) instruct the parties on

their duties in preparing for the Final Pretrial Conference and for trial; and 3) include a form

for the completion of the parties’ Proposed Pretrial Form of Order.

IT IS ORDERED that the attorneys for each party who will be responsible for trial

of the lawsuit shall APPEAR and PARTICIPATE in a Final Pretrial Conference on August

9, 2007, at 4:00 p.m. in courtroom # 605 on the sixth floor of the United States Courthouse,

401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona. Because the Final Pretrial Conference is

held for the benefit of all parties, and further because the presence of all parties will facilitate

frank discussion of the pertinent issues in the lawsuit, each party, or a representative with

binding settlement authority if the party is an entity, shall attend the Final Pretrial

Conference. At the Final Pretrial Conference, the Court shall set a firm trial date.

Case 2:06-cv-00044-SMM Document 30 Filed 12/22/06 Page 6 of 7
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

- 7 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall keep the Court informed

regarding the possibility of settlement and should settlement be reached, the parties shall file

a Notice of Settlement with the Clerk of the Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court views compliance with the provisions

of this Order as critical to its case management responsibilities and the responsibilities of the

parties under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

DATED this 22nd day of December, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-00044-SMM Document 30 Filed 12/22/06 Page 7 of 7