Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00198/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00198-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

 1That is, Defendant shall respond to the issue pertaining to the adequacy of the notice

of claim and whether or not Deer Valley Unified School District No. 97 v. Houser, Arizona

Supreme Court No. CV-06-0275-PR (Feb. 2007) can be applied retroactively.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Dorothy O’Connell, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

David R. Smith, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-0198-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Pursuant to the discussions at the Rule 16 hearing and the resulting agreements of the

parties, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

1. In anticipation of framing the issues for the Supreme Court of Arizona, Defendants

shall file a Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 21)

no later than May 25, 2007. The Response shall address only the first and fourth

issues raised in Plaintiff's motion1

, as well as the issue of who, under A.R.S. § 11-

594(B)(1), had the legal authority to fire the Deputy Medical Director at the time

Dorothy O'Connell's employment was terminated. Plaintiff shall file its Reply brief

no later than June 15, 2007.

Case 2:07-cv-00198-SMM Document 35 Filed 04/25/07 Page 1 of 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 - 2 -

2. The remainder of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21) is DENIED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE to re-file at a later date.

3. Defendant's Rule 56(f) motion (Doc. 31) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refile at a later date.

4. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 3) is GRANTED WITH PREJUDICE as to

Counts One and Two and GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Count Three,

with leave to re-file Count Three at a later date.

5. Parties are permitted to depose Dr. Keen strictly pertaining to his recollection of the

conversation he had with Judge McNamee pertaining to Dr. Keen's "issue with his

management". The deposition shall be held no later than May 18, 2007. Cost to

Plaintiff.

6. Parties shall file with the Court any notice seeking recusal based on the findings at the

deposition of Dr. Keen no later than May 25, 2007.

7. The Order (Doc. 32) requiring parties to file supplemental briefs pertaining to the

issues in Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is hereby VACATED.

DATED this 25th day of April, 2007.

Case 2:07-cv-00198-SMM Document 35 Filed 04/25/07 Page 2 of 2