Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cunningham v. Hansen

United States District Court, D. Nebraska

September 21, 2018

JAY CUNNINGHAM, Personal Representative of the Estate of Michael Galindo, Deceased; Plaintiff,
v.
BRAD HANSEN, in his official and individual capacities; SCOTT FRAKES, in his official and individual capacities; STATE OF NEBRASKA, and DOES 1 - 10, in their official and individual capacities; Defendants.

          ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE FOR PROGRESSION OF CASE

          MICHAEL D. NELSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         A Telephone Conference was held in this matter on September 21, 2018, with counsel for the parties. In accordance with the matters discussed at the Conference, and after review of the Rule 26(f) Report (Filing No. 25), IT IS ORDERED:

         1. Authorization and Sequence of Discovery.

         The parties may now commence discovery. That discovery required to prepare the case for mediation or other settlement negotiations and that discovery required to prepare the case for possible summary judgment disposition shall be conducted before other discovery.

         2. Mandatory Disclosures

         Described in Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1) shall be served by November 1, 2018.

         3. The filing of disclosures

         Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1), and (2), as well as the filing of discovery documents, depositions, and disclosures required by this order shall be governed by NECivR 26.1. The disclosures required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(3) shall be filed when served. Note: Disclosures that are filed should be redacted so no personal information (e.g., home addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers, etc.) is made part of the public record.

         4. Withholding Documents from Disclosure or Discovery.

         If any document is withheld from production or disclosure on the grounds of privilege or work product, the producing party shall disclose the following information about each such document withheld: a description of the document withheld with as much specificity as is practicable without disclosing its contents, including (a) the general nature of the document; (b) the identity and position of its author; (c) the date it was written; (d) the identity and position of its addressee; (e) the identities and positions of all persons who were given or have received copies of it and the dates copies were received by them; (f) the document's present location and the identity and position of its custodian; and (g) the specific reason or reasons why it has been withheld from production or disclosure.

         5. Limits on Discovery.

         Each party is limited to serving twenty-five (25) interrogatories on any other party. The plaintiffs as a group, and the defendants as a group, are each limited to taking ten (10) depositions in this case, without leave of court.

         6. Adding Parties; Amending Pleadings.

         Any motion to amend pleadings and/or add parties shall be filed by the Plaintiff not later than February 15, 2019, and by the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.