Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 8 of
8
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 RegisterActionDate "2016-07-27" @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On review of Plaintiff's motion to appoint special representative and to compel 100 , the defense response to the motion, and Plaintiff's related motion 107 , the Court grants in part and denies in part the motions as follows: Defendant Wexford shall disclose any document that identifies the name of "the executor of Dr. Taller's estate or a surviving family member," R. 106 at 3, and any contact information for that person or persons. To minimize the burden on Wexford, Wexford need only examine Taller's personnel file (whether in paper or electronic form) and search no more than that. Perhaps Plaintiff should have issued a formal discovery before moving to compel, but if that is the defense's genuine reason for objection, then requiring that formal back/forth now would just cause more expense and delay. Perhaps Plaintiff should have pursued the information more quickly, but given that the severance/transfer motions are pending and the case is in the very early stages, plus the broad discretion to extend time to serve under Rule 4(m), that is not enough of a reason to deny the requested relief. The documents (or a letter stating that none were found) are due from Wexford by 08/03/2016. The request to approve a special representative is premature, because Plaintiff has not determined whether there was an executor of the estate, which be the proper party if identified. That aspect of the motion is denied without prejudice. In view of the circumstances, Plaintiff's extension motion 109 to serve Nurse Candy Doe, Doctor John Doe, and Steven Taller is granted to 08/24/2016, but any further extensions will require a detailed explanation of service efforts made between now and then (in particular for Doctor John Doe; the current motion did not explain what efforts have been made to identify this doctor, who allegedly examined Plaintiff in 12/2011). The motion to reset 111 the status hearing is granted in part. The status hearing of 08/03/2016 is reset to 09/01/2016 at 9:45 AM.Emailed notice (slb, ) (Entered: 07/27/2016)" @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 AdministrativeID "113" @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 hasJudgeReference SJ000187 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de105 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de112 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de114 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de118 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01077_de116 @default.