Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 19.4 kB
Pages: 4
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 875 Words, 5,351 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/43229/428-1.pdf

Download Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Arizona ( 19.4 kB)


Preview Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Arizona
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Ray K. Harris, # 007408 FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. 3003 N. Central Ave., Suite 2600 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2913 [email protected] (602) 916-5414 Edward R. Garvey, admitted pro hac vice GARVEY McNEIL & McGILLIVRAY 634 W. Main Street, Suite 101 Madison, WI 53703 (608) 256-1003 Attorneys for Defendants Harlem Globetrotters Int' Inc., l, and Mannie L. & Catherine Jackson UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA No. CV-04-0299 PHX DGC and CV-04-1023 PHX DGC JOINT REQUEST FOR SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

12 MEADOWLARK LEMON, et al., 13 14

Plaintiffs, vs. HARLEM GLOBETROTTERS Defendants.

15 INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al.; 16 17

HARLEM GLOBETROTTERS 18 INTERNATIONAL, INC., an Arizona corporation,
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Case 2:04-cv-00299-DGC PHX/RHARRIS/1812028.2/43458.007 Document 428 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 1 of 4

Counterclaimant, vs. MEADOWLARK LEMON, a married man, Counterdefendant. Pursuant to L. R. Civ. 83.10 Defendants request that the Court appoint a Magistrate for settlement purposes and require the parties to participate in mediation during the next 30-60 days pursuant to U.S.C. ยง 652(a). Plaintiffs join in this request.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

The initial scheduling order entered in November 2004 required the parties to engage in settlement discussions by January 28, 2005. A settlement conference between the parties was conducted on January 21, 2005, as reflected in the joint report filed February 4, 2005. At that time the Plaintiffs required additional information to engage in settlement discussions. Plaintiffs have not initiated any subsequent settlement discussions; however, the parties engaged in extensive discovery and briefing on motions for summary judgment. By Order dated June 27, 2006 the Court disposed of the cross motions for summary judgment and the motion to strike Plaintiffs' expert report. The Court' ruling substantially narrowed the issue for trial and s should facilitate the possibility of settlement. Before the parties could discuss settlement, however, the Court also entered its June 27, 2006 Order setting a final pretrial conference on August 30 and requiring the parties to draft and exchange lists of witnesses and exhibits as early as July 26. Although the Local Rule expressly provides "alternative dispute resolution shall not be offered as a reason to delay the processing of the case as established in the Rule 16 Scheduling Order", the Court' June 27 ruling narrowing Plaintiff' claims and focusing Plaintiff' damages s s s analysis creates an opportunity for settlement that did not previously exist. The simultaneously issued Scheduling Order does not permit adequate time to schedule a settlement conference and requires the parties to incur substantial attorneys' fees that would otherwise be available to fund a settlement of this case. The parties acknowledge this action has been pending since 2004 and does need to proceed to a resolution; however, a delay of 30-60 days to permit the parties to engage in settlement efforts could avoid the need for a trial and could facilitate the just speedy and expensive determination of this action as contemplated by Rule 1. In light of the Court' s comprehensive June 27 order on the motions for summary judgment settlement should be explored. A proposed form of order is attached. ... ...

26 Case 2:04-cv-00299-DGC PHX/RHARRIS/1812028.2/43458.007 Document 428
2

Filed 07/07/2006

Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 7th day of July, 2006. FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. By: s/Ray K. Harris Ray Harris 3003 N. Central Ave., Suite 2600 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2913 Edward R. Garvey GARVEY McNEIL & McGILLIVRAY 634 W. Main St. #101 Madison, WI 53703 Attorneys for Defendants Harlem Globetrotters Int' Inc. and Mannie L. & Catherine Jackson l, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1. I hereby certify that on July 7, 2006, a true and correct copy of the attached document was electronically transmitted to the Clerk' Office using the CM/ECF System for s filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: Safia A Anand - [email protected] Florence M Bruemmer - [email protected] Edward R Garvey - [email protected] [email protected],[email protected] Robert Williams Goldwater, III - [email protected] Joel Louis Herz - [email protected] [email protected] Brandon Scott Peters - [email protected] [email protected],[email protected] Anders V Rosenquist, Jr - [email protected] Ira S Sacks - [email protected] Clay M Townsend - [email protected] [email protected];[email protected] Christa O Westerberg - [email protected] 2. I hereby certify that on July 7, 2006, a true and correct copy of the attached document was sent via U.S. Mail, postage paid thereon, to the following parties, at the addresses listed:
Case 2:04-cv-00299-DGC PHX/RHARRIS/1812028.2/43458.007 Document 428
3

Filed 07/07/2006

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Keith R Mitnik Morgan Colling & Gilbert PA 20 N Orange Ave Ste 1600 Orlando, FL 32802

s/Melody Tolliver

Case 2:04-cv-00299-DGC PHX/RHARRIS/1812028.2/43458.007

Document 428
4

Filed 07/07/2006

Page 4 of 4