Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

CALVIN REGISTER,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:09cv349-RH/WCS

COASTAL FOREST RESOURCES

COMPANY,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO DEPOSE SPECIFIC WITNESSES

BUT RETAINING THE SUMMARY-JUDGMENT DEADLINE

The discovery deadline was May 3, 2010; the deadline to begin mediation is

May 17, 2010; and the deadline for filing summary-judgment motions is May 24,

2010. The defendant filed on April 21, 2010, a consented motion for leave to

depose specific witnesses by May 14, 2010. (Document 16.) An order was signed

on May 4 granting the consented motion. (Document 22.) The order did not

extend the mediation and summary-judgment deadlines. As it turns out, the

defendant withdrew the motion on May 5, just prior to the actual posting of the

order that had been signed on May 4. The record does not indicate whether the
Page 2 of 3

defendant did or did not proceed with the depositions.

The plaintiff moved on May 3 for leave to depose specific witnesses by May

20. (Document 19.) The defendant opposes the motion unless the summaryjudgment deadline also is extended. The parties’s positions are set out in a series

of filings. (Documents 23, 24, and 25.)

This order grants leave to depose the specific witnesses but does not extend

the summary-judgment deadline. 

Taking the depositions will not affect the overall schedule. And so far as the

record reflects, taking the depositions after the May 3 deadline, rather than before

it, will cause no significant inconvenience to anybody. 

Delaying the summary-judgment deadline is different. The schedule

provides a limited window for the parties to brief, and the court to decide, a

summary-judgment motion filed at or near the deadline. The scheduling and

mediation order (document 8), which was entered more than six months ago,

advised the parties to file any summary-judgment motion at the earliest appropriate

time. The order noted that it is rarely necessary for a motion to await the

completion of discovery. Indeed, in an employment-discrimination case, any wellfounded defense motion for summary-judgment usually can be filed promptly after

the plaintiff is deposed. The defendant has suggested no reason why it has delayed

filing a summary-judgment motion until now. And it has suggested no reason why

Case No: 4:09cv349-RH/WCS
Page 3 of 3

it needs to wait longer. 

If there is a reason for a delay, the defendant can move to extend the

deadline. Attorney convenience can be an acceptable reason in this instance as in

most others. But the defendant should take note: in this instance the defense

attorney’s convenience in delaying the motion may impose an inconvenience on

the plaintiff’s attorney and the court. Having delayed the filing of a summaryjudgment motion to this point, the defendant should not ask for a further delay

unless it has good cause. 

For these reasons,

IT IS ORDERED:

The plaintiff’s motion for leave to depose specific witnesses (document 19)

is GRANTED. The discovery deadline remains May 3, 2010, and thus has passed. 

The parties are granted leave to depose by May 20, 2010, the specific witnesses

identified in the motion. This order does not extend the mediation and summaryjudgment deadlines.

SO ORDERED on May 15, 2010.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

United States District Judge

Case No: 4:09cv349-RH/WCS