Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00703/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-00703-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 330
Nature of Suit: Federal Employers' Liability
Cause of Action: 45:51 Railways: Fed. Employer's Liability 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KIRK CURLS,

NO. CIV. S-02-703 LKK/JFM

Plaintiff,

v. O R D E R

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY,

Defendant.

 /

A Pretrial Conference is now set in the above-captioned

case for May 2, 2005 at 3:00 p.m. On April 28, 2005, counsel

for plaintiff notified the court that he is unable to appear for

the Pretrial Conference and requested that it be rescheduled. 

In his statement, counsel explains that he is currently expected

to be in trial on May 2 in an unrelated case, and that any

interruption of the trial will interfere with the rights of his

client in that case. He also states that he has “numerous other

scheduling problems.” 

////

Case 2:02-cv-00703-LKK -KJM Document 52 Filed 04/29/05 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

2

Counsel’s requests for continuances and other procedural

defaults are not new to this court. On April 18, 2005, counsel

filed a declaration explaining why he failed to file a joint

pretrial statement as required by Local Rule 16-281 in the

instant case. In that declaration, counsel explained that

another “trial ha[d] made it very difficult to keep up with

[his] other litigation work.” In response, the court ordered

the parties to appear in chambers on May 2, 2005 to draft a

joint pretrial statement, after which the court would hold a

Pretrial Conference. Again, however, counsel cannot comply with

the court’s order. 

Because it appears that counsel is unable to represent the

interests of his client in this case, and in order to prevent

further waste of judicial resources, the court will take no

further action in this case until plaintiff obtains additional

counsel or can in some manner demonstrate that he has counsel

able to represent him. 

Accordingly, the Pretrial Conference and trial date are

hereby VACATED. The court intends to take no further action in

this case pending a motion to set for pretrial, making the

requisite showing. Should the case languish for an additional

three months, it will be dismissed for lack of prosecution.

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 29, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:02-cv-00703-LKK -KJM Document 52 Filed 04/29/05 Page 2 of 2