Preview
27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court
4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM
Hennepin County Civil, MN
State of Minnesota District Court
County of Hennepin Fourth Judicial District
Judge Bruce D. Manning
Ayawavi Degbe, Case Type: Conciliation Appeal
Plaintiff,
Scheduling Order
v.
Abdoulaye Toure,
Defendant. Case No. 27-CV-15-4412
Appearances:
Ayawavi Degbe on her own behalf
Abdoulaye Toure on his own behalf
The following schedule shall govern this case.
1. Discovery shall be completed—that is, all depositions completed, all
interrogatories answered, all requests for production responded to and
responsive documents produced, all requests for admission propounded and
responded to, and any privilege logs exchanged—on or before June 1, 2015.
2. No discovery dispute may be brought before the Court unless the parties have
conferred and made a good faith effort to settle their dispute as contemplated
by Minn. R. Civ. P. 37.01(b) and Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 115.10. The party raising
an unresolved discovery issue shall first arrange a telephone conference with
the Court and the other party or parties to determine if the dispute can be
resolved without a formal motion. In the event a telephone conference is
scheduled, the party requesting the telephone conference may submit to the
Court, seventy-two hours before the conference, a letter, no longer than two
pages, outlining with specificity the issue(s) to be addressed with the Court.
The other party or parties may submit a responsive letter subject to the same
length and specificity conditions twenty-four hours before the conference. The
correspondence must be filed with the Court as well as courtesy copied by
email to Anya.Pavlov-Shapiro@courts.state.mn.us. No motion or submission
27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court
4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM
Hennepin County Civil, MN
other than these letters shall be filed before the telephone conference. Only if
the telephone conference does not resolve the dispute may a formal motion be
scheduled.
3. All motions shall be scheduled to be heard on or before June 8, 2015.
4. No motion will be heard unless the parties have conferred either in person or
by telephone in an attempt to resolve their difference before the scheduled
hearing. The moving party shall initiate such communications. The moving
party shall certify to the Court, before the time of the hearing, compliance with
this order or any reasons for not complying. Whenever any pending motion is
settled, the moving party shall promptly advise the Court.
5. Any party that wishes to request a pre-trial or settlement conference (after the
mediation date) may do so by making a written request, copying the other
parties, to the Court’s clerk.
6. The matter is set for a court trial before the Honorable Bruce D. Manning on
June 16, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom C-1657, Hennepin County Government
Center, 300 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487. If a party has a
conflict which cannot be resolved during this period, it must be made known
to the Court and the other parties within 15 days of this Order.
a. By no later than June 2, 2015, the parties must exchange (a) exhibit
lists and copies of all exhibits and (b) witness lists disclosing the names
and addresses of all prospective witnesses.
b. By no later than June 9, 2015, each of the parties must file an exhibit
list and witness list with the Court. If the exhibit list and the witness
list are mailed to the Court rather than electronically filed—only
self-represented parties may mail things to the Court—then they
must be mailed so that they arrive at the Court by June 9, 2015.
Other matters
7. The clerk for this case is Anya Pavlov-Shapiro, Anya.Pavlov-
Shapiro@courts.state.mn.us, (612) 543-1786.
8. In accordance with Rule 6.04(b) of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure,
weekend days and legal holidays shall be excluded when computing time
2
27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court
4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM
Hennepin County Civil, MN
periods of less than seven days. For example, in the case of a Monday motion
hearing with no legal holiday during the preceding week, the reply
memorandum is due on the preceding Wednesday.
9. Parties needing an interpreter for court hearings shall immediately, upon
receipt of this Order, notify the Court of the need for an interpreter and of the
language requested.
10. No adjustments to this scheduling order may be made by stipulation of the
parties without approval of the Court. No changes to this scheduling order
may be sought without filing a motion. The Court will not entertain requests to
amend the scheduling order telephonically or by email. As with all motions,
the non-moving party must be consulted before any such motion is filed. If
there is an objection to the motion, the moving party shall so state in its moving
papers. A motion which has been objected to must be served at least by email
or fax on any other party in the case who is not registered to receive e-filing
notifications. A party objecting to a motion to modify the scheduling order
shall have three business days to make its response. Requests for amendments
to this scheduling order will be granted only for good cause.
11. It if appears by notice of motion and motion or otherwise that a party has failed
to comply with a provision of this Order, the party will be subject to
appropriate sanctions, including attorney’s fees and costs, striking of
pleadings, preclusion of evidence, default judgment, dismissal of the case, or
any other relief deemed appropriate by the Court.
12. All attorneys representing a party in this matter are required to add themselves
immediately to the electronic Master Service List for this case. The Court will
issue and distribute all orders in this matter electronically. The Court will not
send attorneys or represented clients a hard-copy of documents filed by the
Court. Attorneys who fail to abide by this requirement may be subject to
sanction. Unrepresented parties are excluded from this requirement and will
receive Court orders by mail.
13. Counsel and their clients are reminded of Minn. R. Civ. P. 1, as amended
effective July 1, 2013, which reads as follows:
These rules govern the procedure in the district courts of the State
of Minnesota in all suits of a civil nature, with the exceptions
stated in Rule 81. They shall be construed and administered to
3
27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court
4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM
Hennepin County Civil, MN
secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every
action.
It is the responsibility of the court and the parties to examine each
civil action to assure that the process and the costs are
proportionate to the amount in controversy and the complexity
and importance of the issues. The factors to be considered by the
court in making a proportionality assessment include, without
limitation: needs of the case, amount in controversy, parties’
resources, and complexity and importance of the issues at stake in
the litigation.
By the Court:
April 28, 2015 _________________________________________
Bruce D. Manning, Judge of District Court
4
Preview
27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court 4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM Hennepin County Civil, MN State of Minnesota District Court County of Hennepin Fourth Judicial District Judge Bruce D. Manning Ayawavi Degbe, Case Type: Conciliation Appeal Plaintiff, Scheduling Order v. Abdoulaye Toure, Defendant. Case No. 27-CV-15-4412 Appearances: Ayawavi Degbe on her own behalf Abdoulaye Toure on his own behalf The following schedule shall govern this case. 1. Discovery shall be completed—that is, all depositions completed, all interrogatories answered, all requests for production responded to and responsive documents produced, all requests for admission propounded and responded to, and any privilege logs exchanged—on or before June 1, 2015. 2. No discovery dispute may be brought before the Court unless the parties have conferred and made a good faith effort to settle their dispute as contemplated by Minn. R. Civ. P. 37.01(b) and Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 115.10. The party raising an unresolved discovery issue shall first arrange a telephone conference with the Court and the other party or parties to determine if the dispute can be resolved without a formal motion. In the event a telephone conference is scheduled, the party requesting the telephone conference may submit to the Court, seventy-two hours before the conference, a letter, no longer than two pages, outlining with specificity the issue(s) to be addressed with the Court. The other party or parties may submit a responsive letter subject to the same length and specificity conditions twenty-four hours before the conference. The correspondence must be filed with the Court as well as courtesy copied by email to Anya.Pavlov-Shapiro@courts.state.mn.us. No motion or submission 27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court 4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM Hennepin County Civil, MN other than these letters shall be filed before the telephone conference. Only if the telephone conference does not resolve the dispute may a formal motion be scheduled. 3. All motions shall be scheduled to be heard on or before June 8, 2015. 4. No motion will be heard unless the parties have conferred either in person or by telephone in an attempt to resolve their difference before the scheduled hearing. The moving party shall initiate such communications. The moving party shall certify to the Court, before the time of the hearing, compliance with this order or any reasons for not complying. Whenever any pending motion is settled, the moving party shall promptly advise the Court. 5. Any party that wishes to request a pre-trial or settlement conference (after the mediation date) may do so by making a written request, copying the other parties, to the Court’s clerk. 6. The matter is set for a court trial before the Honorable Bruce D. Manning on June 16, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom C-1657, Hennepin County Government Center, 300 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487. If a party has a conflict which cannot be resolved during this period, it must be made known to the Court and the other parties within 15 days of this Order. a. By no later than June 2, 2015, the parties must exchange (a) exhibit lists and copies of all exhibits and (b) witness lists disclosing the names and addresses of all prospective witnesses. b. By no later than June 9, 2015, each of the parties must file an exhibit list and witness list with the Court. If the exhibit list and the witness list are mailed to the Court rather than electronically filed—only self-represented parties may mail things to the Court—then they must be mailed so that they arrive at the Court by June 9, 2015. Other matters 7. The clerk for this case is Anya Pavlov-Shapiro, Anya.Pavlov- Shapiro@courts.state.mn.us, (612) 543-1786. 8. In accordance with Rule 6.04(b) of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, weekend days and legal holidays shall be excluded when computing time 2 27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court 4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM Hennepin County Civil, MN periods of less than seven days. For example, in the case of a Monday motion hearing with no legal holiday during the preceding week, the reply memorandum is due on the preceding Wednesday. 9. Parties needing an interpreter for court hearings shall immediately, upon receipt of this Order, notify the Court of the need for an interpreter and of the language requested. 10. No adjustments to this scheduling order may be made by stipulation of the parties without approval of the Court. No changes to this scheduling order may be sought without filing a motion. The Court will not entertain requests to amend the scheduling order telephonically or by email. As with all motions, the non-moving party must be consulted before any such motion is filed. If there is an objection to the motion, the moving party shall so state in its moving papers. A motion which has been objected to must be served at least by email or fax on any other party in the case who is not registered to receive e-filing notifications. A party objecting to a motion to modify the scheduling order shall have three business days to make its response. Requests for amendments to this scheduling order will be granted only for good cause. 11. It if appears by notice of motion and motion or otherwise that a party has failed to comply with a provision of this Order, the party will be subject to appropriate sanctions, including attorney’s fees and costs, striking of pleadings, preclusion of evidence, default judgment, dismissal of the case, or any other relief deemed appropriate by the Court. 12. All attorneys representing a party in this matter are required to add themselves immediately to the electronic Master Service List for this case. The Court will issue and distribute all orders in this matter electronically. The Court will not send attorneys or represented clients a hard-copy of documents filed by the Court. Attorneys who fail to abide by this requirement may be subject to sanction. Unrepresented parties are excluded from this requirement and will receive Court orders by mail. 13. Counsel and their clients are reminded of Minn. R. Civ. P. 1, as amended effective July 1, 2013, which reads as follows: These rules govern the procedure in the district courts of the State of Minnesota in all suits of a civil nature, with the exceptions stated in Rule 81. They shall be construed and administered to 3 27-CV-15-4412 Filed in Fourth Judicial District Court 4/28/2015 3:19:34 PM Hennepin County Civil, MN secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action. It is the responsibility of the court and the parties to examine each civil action to assure that the process and the costs are proportionate to the amount in controversy and the complexity and importance of the issues. The factors to be considered by the court in making a proportionality assessment include, without limitation: needs of the case, amount in controversy, parties’ resources, and complexity and importance of the issues at stake in the litigation. By the Court: April 28, 2015 _________________________________________ Bruce D. Manning, Judge of District Court 4