Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-00671/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-00671-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert D. Gentry
Plaintiff
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
Defendant

Document Text:

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT D. GENTRY,

NO. CIV. S-09-0671 LKK/GGH 

Plaintiff,

v.

O R D E R

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE

INSURANCE COMPANY, and 

Does 1-100, 

Defendants.

 /

At issue here is a motion to amend a scheduling order.

Plaintiff did not timely file his expert witness’s report, yet

seeks to rely on the report in opposition to defendant’s motion for

summary judgment. Plaintiff now, four months after the untimely

filing, moves to amend the scheduling order to make the expert

report admissible evidence. After hearing on June 7, 2010, the

court grants plaintiff’s motion, but also sanctions plaintiff’s

counsel for his failure to timely move to amend the scheduling

order and to ensure that his expert witness timely prepared his

report.

For the foregoing reasons the court orders as follows:

(1) Plaintiff’s motion to amend the scheduling order, Dkt.

Case 2:09-cv-00671-LKK -KJN Document 57 Filed 06/09/10 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

2

No. 50, is GRANTED;

(2) Counsel for plaintiff will be SANCTIONED to pay

defendant’s attorneys fees in preparing its reply brief

to the summary judgment motion, Dkt. No. 44, in

preparing its opposition to plaintiff’s motion to amend

the complaint, Dkt. No. 52, and for its counsel's

attendance at the June 7, 2010 hearing on the motion to

amend the scheduling order. 

(3) Defendant is ordered to file within seven (7) days of

the issuance of this order an affidavit stating the

attorney’s fees incurred in preparing its reply brief to

the summary judgment motion, Dkt. No. 44, in preparing

its opposition to plaintiff’s motion to amend the

complaint, Dkt. No. 52, and its attendance at the June

7, 2010 hearing on the motion to amend the scheduling

order. This affidavit should only state the amount of

fees to draft the reply brief, the opposition to the

motion to amend the scheduling order, and for its

counsel's attendance at the hearing on the motion to

amend. The affidavit should not include any fees

incurred to prepare any other summary judgment papers.

Plaintiff may file objections to defendants’ affidavit

within fourteen (14) days of the issuance of this order.

(4) The court shall issue a further order concerning the

amount of fees plaintiff’s counsel shall pay to

defendant.

Case 2:09-cv-00671-LKK -KJN Document 57 Filed 06/09/10 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

3

(5) Counsel for plaintiff is further SANCTIONED in the

amount of two hundred and fifty ($250.00) dollars. This

sum shall be paid to the Clerk of the Court no later

than thirty (30) days from the date of this order.

Counsel shall file an affidavit accompanying the payment

of this sanction which states that it is paid personally

by counsel, out of personal funds, and is not and will

not be billed, directly or indirectly, to the client or

in any way made the responsibility of the client as

attorneys' fees or costs.

(6) Defendant may file a sur-reply to its motion for summary

judgment, Dkt. No. 31, on or before June 14, 2010.

(7) Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 31,

shall be heard on June 21, 2010 at 10:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 8, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-00671-LKK -KJN Document 57 Filed 06/09/10 Page 3 of 3