Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01524/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01524-18/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 240
Nature of Suit: Torts to Land
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Torts to Land

---

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

Kathy L. Jamieson, an individual,

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

Lawrence B. Slater, et al., 

Defendants. 

Monica Jagelski,

Plaintiff

v.

Kathy Marchant (a.k.a Jamieson)

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 06-1524-PHX-SMM

No. CIV 06-2261-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Currently before the Court is the Motion to Extend Discovery and Dispositive Motion

Deadlines (Doc. 121) filed by Defendant and Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant James Bret

Marchant and Defendant Jane Doe Marchant (collectively "Marchant"), Plaintiff Oasis

Pipeliner, LLC ("Oasis"), Defendants Lawrence B. Slater, Jane Doe Slater and Lawrence

Case 2:06-cv-01524-SMM Document 124 Filed 08/01/08 Page 1 of 3
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 moving parties are amenable to setting a mediation to resolve the claims in these cases

without unnecessary expenditure -- if Jamieson is willing to do so.

- 2 -

Slater & Associates, P.C. (collectively "Slater"), and Defendant/Plaintiff Monica Jagelski

("Jagelski") (collectively referred to hereafter as the "moving parties")1

.

According to the moving parties, the current dates have become untenable based upon

unforseen events in the divorce proceeding between James Marchant and Kathy Jamieson, entitled

In re the Marriage of Kathy L. Marchant and James Bret Marchant, case no. FN 2003-091251,

Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County ("divorce action"). There remains an unresolved issue

as to the valuation of Oasis - a party to one of these matters - an entity previously owned by James

Bret Marchant and Kathy Jamieson and currently owned solely by Marchant. 

At the time the March 2008 scheduling order was entered, a hearing in the divorce action on

the valuation of Oasis was scheduled for May 2008. However, the hearing was subsequently moved

to July 18, 2008 -- one week before the discovery cut-off in this action. This hearing took place

weeks beyond what had been anticipated at the time the parties in these matters agreed to

consolidate the cases. Each of these parties has damage claims related to the operation of Oasis.

Judge Edward Ballinger heard evidence from both parties, including an expert on valuation of Oasis

hired by Jamieson, and declined to make a determination of the value of Oasis. Instead, he decided

to appoint a Special Master to investigate and make a report as to the value of Oasis. This decision

will necessarily add several months to the process of determining the value of Oasis. 

Given these circumstances, it would be practically unfeasible and fundamentally

unfair for discovery and motion practice to end in these matters without allowing counsel for

all of the parties to address those issues in these ongoing matters. Furthermore, the Court

finds that it is only due to these unforeseen events that are beyond the moving parties' control

that the instant motion was filed. Greenawalt v. Sun City West Fire Dist., 250 F. Supp. 2d

1200, 1206-07 (D. Ariz. 2003) ("the district court may modify the pretrial schedule 'if it

Case 2:06-cv-01524-SMM Document 124 Filed 08/01/08 Page 2 of 3
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 - 3 -

cannot reasonably (sic) be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension'"); see

also Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). 

Accordingly, good cause shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all dates set in the Court's Order of March 27, 2008

(Doc. 108), and any deadlines set thereafter will be extended by this Order to include the

following:

1. All discovery, including depositions of parties, witnesses, and experts, answers to

interrogatories, and supplements to interrogatories must be completed by Friday, December

26, 2008; 

2. All dispositive motions shall be filed no later than Friday, February 20, 2009; and

3. All other dates set as "TBA" (Doc. 80) will continue to be open for future

determination by this Court. 

DATED this 1st day of August, 2008.

Case 2:06-cv-01524-SMM Document 124 Filed 08/01/08 Page 3 of 3