4:24-cv-03069•MAK Development LLC et al v. City of Lincoln, Nebraska et al
MAK Development LLC et al v. City of Lincoln, Nebraska et al
4:24-cv-03069Ned1 de dez. de 2025
Texto completo
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA MAK DEVELOPMENT LLC, A Nebraska Limited Liability Company; and MICHAEL CORRADO, An Individual; Plaintiffs, vs. CITY OF LINCOLN, NEBRASKA, a Nebraska municipal corporation; Defendant. 4:24CV3069 FIRST AMENDED FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER This matter is before the court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Amend the Progression Order. (Filing No. 70). That motion is granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the final progression order is amended as follows: 1) The trial and pretrial conference will not be set at this time. A status conference to discuss case progression, the parties’ interest in settlement, and the trial and pretrial conference settings originally scheduled on January 7, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. is continued and will now be held with the undersigned magistrate judge on March 10, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. by telephone. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. (Filing No. 56). 2) The deadline for completing written discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36 and 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is February 17, 2026. Motions to compel written discovery under Rules 33, 34, 36, and 45 must be filed by March 3, 2026. 4:24-cv-03069-SMB-RCC Doc # 71 Filed: 12/01/25 Page 1 of 3 - Page ID # <pageID>
Note: A discovery motion (including a motion to compel, to quash, or for a disputed protective order, or any motion regarding the scope and production of ESI) cannot be filed without first: a) thoroughly discussing the issue with opposing counsel in good faith (NECivR 7.1(j)); and then b) contacting the chambers of the undersigned magistrate judge to set a conference for discussing the parties’ dispute. The failure to contact the court prior to filing a discovery motion may result in an order striking the motion. 3) The deadlines for identifying expert witnesses expected to testify at the trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non-retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are: For the plaintiff(s): March 17, 2026. For the defendant(s): April 20, 2026. 4) The deadlines for complete expert disclosures1 for all experts expected to testify at trial, (both retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B)), and non- retained experts, (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)), are: For the plaintiff(s): April 20, 2026. For the defendant(s): May 18, 2026. 5) The deposition deadline, including but not limited to depositions for oral testimony only under Rule 45, is June 30, 2026. a. The maximum number of depositions that may be taken by the plaintiffs as a group and the defendants as a group is 10. b. Depositions will be limited by Rule 30(d)(1). 6) The deadline for filing motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment is July 31, 2026. 7) The deadline for filing motions to exclude testimony on Daubert and related grounds is October 2, 2026. 1 While treating medical and mental health care providers are generally not considered “specially retained experts,” not all their opinions relate to the care and treatment of a patient. Their opinion testimony is limited to what is stated within their treatment documentation. As to each such expert, any opinions which are not stated within that expert’s treatment records and reports must be separately and timely disclosed. 4:24-cv-03069-SMB-RCC Doc # 71 Filed: 12/01/25 Page 2 of 3 - Page ID # <pageID>
8) Motions in limine shall be filed twenty-eight days before trial. It is not the normal practice to hold hearings on motions in limine or to rule on them prior to the first day of trial. Counsel should plan accordingly. 9) The parties shall comply with all other stipulations and agreements recited in their Rule 26(f) planning report that are not inconsistent with this order. 10) All requests for changes of deadlines or settings established herein shall be directed to the undersigned magistrate judge, including all requests for changes of trial dates. Such requests will not be considered absent a showing of due diligence in the timely progression of this case and the recent development of circumstances, unanticipated prior to the filing of the motion, which require that additional time be allowed. Dated this 1st day of December, 2025. BY THE COURT: s/ Ryan C. Carson United States Magistrate Judge 4:24-cv-03069-SMB-RCC Doc # 71 Filed: 12/01/25 Page 3 of 3 - Page ID # <pageID>
Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.