Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 239

Filed 05/01/2008

Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

CLARENCE R. COLLINS, JR., et al Plaintiffs, VS. OLIN CORPORATION, et al Defendants

: : : : : : : :

3:03-CV-945 (CFD)

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER Pursuant to the Court's Order, dated April 15, 2008, the Plaintiffs hereby submit a revised Scheduling Order1 for the remaining fact and expert discovery in this case. After negotiations, the Plaintiffs report that the parties were not able to resolve their differences on this Motion prior to the Court's deadline. Therefore, the Plaintiffs submit their own motion. The Plaintiffs suggest bifurcating discovery into two phases. In support of this Motion, the Plaintiffs first provide a brief background of recent events which have bearing on their Motion: BACKGROUND 1. Throughout 2007, the parties propounded written discovery, and Olin made a number of productions of documents. 2. However, because of the age of the documents involved in the case, and the number of different persons who hold those records, the Parties are only now nearing the point where they have all the relevant records and are just beginning deposition discovery. As such, the Plaintiffs just conducted the first phase of a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of the Defendant in January 2008, and several additional
1

The applicable Scheduling Order was approved by the Court on November 13, 2006 (Docket #188).

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 239

Filed 05/01/2008

Page 2 of 5

phases remain, in addition to depositions of persons not within the control of either side. 3. On February 21, 2008, the Court granted the Plaintiffs' Third Amended Motion to Certify Class. 4. On April 4, 2008, the Court granted the Plaintiffs' request for an extension of time for filing their Opposition to the Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket #234). The Plaintiffs' Opposition is now due by May 12, 2008. 5. Besides responding to the Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in the instant case, two of the three law firms representing the Plaintiffs have been engaged in preparing for trial in another large environmental contamination case in the U.S. District Court, District of Rhode Island. Preparation for the trial entailed 7-day weeks for most of the past three months. Just last week, the Court postponed trial for four (4) months in order to give the parties the opportunity to complete a settlement agreement. This will prove to be very time-intensive as the issues to be resolved involve approximately 100 contaminated properties and complex environmental/legal issues. 6. As a result of the trial schedule in the Rhode Island and the ongoing commitments required, the Plaintiffs have not been able to proceed as far with merits discovery in this case as they had hoped, and require additional time. THE PLAINTIFFS PROPOSE A TWO-PHASE DISCOVERY SCHEDULE As the Plaintiffs noted above, on February 21, 2008, the Court allowed the Plaintiffs' Third Amended Motion for Class Certification. See Docket No. 232 at p. 17. The Plaintiffs

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 239

Filed 05/01/2008

Page 3 of 5

propose that, in light of this ruling, discovery would most efficiently proceed if it were bifurcated into two phases. The First Phase would involve issues related to Olin's liability for the alleged environmental contamination at the Class members' properties. The First Phase would involve a period of fact discovery followed by a shorter period for expert discovery on these issues. At the end of the First Phase, the Parties would file motions for summary judgment which would be followed by a period to file their respective oppositions. The Second Phase would focus on damages issues, including what damages the members of the Class (and Subclasses) suffered as a result of Olin's alleged conduct. As in the First Phase, the Second Phase would incorporate a period for fact discovery followed by a shorter period for expert discovery on these issues. The Plaintiffs are confident that this would be the most efficient method of conducting the remaining discovery because it would serve to narrow the issues necessary for discovery and conserve the Parties and the Court's resources. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs propose the following schedule: I. First Phase a. Fact discovery shall be completed by December 31, 2008; b. Expert discovery shall be completed by April 30, 2009; c. Motions for Summary Judgment filed by June 15, 2009; and d. Oppositions to Motions for Summary Judgment filed by July 31, 2009. II. Second Phase The Plaintiffs propose that the Court, at its convenience, schedule a hearing to set fact and expert discovery deadlines for this Phase after July 31, 2009.

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 239

Filed 05/01/2008

Page 4 of 5

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs respectfully request the Court extend fact and expert discovery as set forth herein.

Respectfully submitted,

For the Plaintiffs: By__/s/ Mark W. Roberts____________ Mark Roberts, Esq. ct25062 [email protected] McRoberts, Roberts & Rainer LLP 53 State Street Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Tele: (617) 722-8222 Fax: (617) 720-2320 David B. Zabel, Esq. ct01382 [email protected] Monte E. Frank, Esq. ct13666 [email protected] Cohen and Wolf, PC 1115 Broad Street Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 Tele: (203) 368-0211 Fax: (203) 394-9901 Neil T. Leifer, Esq. [email protected] David C. Strouss, Esq. [email protected] Thornton & Naumes L.L.P 100 Summer Street, 30th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Tele: (617) 720-1333 Fax: (617) 720-2445

Dated: May 1, 2008

Case 3:03-cv-00945-CFD

Document 239

Filed 05/01/2008

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 1, 2008, a copy of foregoing was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF System.

__/s/ Mark W. Roberts