Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

14-2691 - Carter v. Hickory Healthcare Inc. et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
14-2691 - Carter v. Hickory Healthcare Inc. et al
August 4, 2015
PDF | More
Order: Plaintiff's objections to the order and recommendation of the magistrate judge are overruled, with the caveat that her request for permission to reconsider deposing defendants' seven witnesses be given pretrial attention by the magistrate judge going forward. The Court agrees with the magistrate judge that it is always best to have a complete record so as to decide cases on the merits. That said, extending case management deadlines, even slightly, can have a cascading effect. Therefore, the Court now vacates all case management deadlines and refers the case to Magistrate Judge Burke for all pretrial supervision, including consideration and resolution of any and all discovery matters (and, in particular, plaintiff's request with respect to defendants' seven witnesses), for resetting of case management deadlines (provided that any additional continuance is relatively brief), and for a report and recommendation on any dispositive motions. The Court will reschedule a trial date only when the need becomes apparent. The Court also notes that it strongly disapproves of the personal attacks by counsel for both sides, and further disapproves the multiplicity of frivolous filings by both sides brought on by their lack of cooperation. Finally, the Court advises counsel that gratuitous attacks and frivolous filings will not be tolerated and may, in fact, be sanctioned, in the Court's discretion. Emails and telephone messages between counsel are meant to be timely answered and certainly not ignored. Cooperation is not optional, and unprofessional behavior will not be tolerated. (Related Doc. Nos. 27, 42). Judge Sara Lioi on 8/4/2015. (P,J)
November 18, 2015
PDF | More
Report and Recommendation that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 83) should be GRANTED. Additionally, Carter's Motion to Strike Defendant's Reply Brief or, in the Alternative, Motion to Permit Plaintiff to File a Sur-Reply (Doc. 105) is DENIED. Defendant's Motion to Substitute (Doc. 106) is GRANTED. Carter is reminded that her response to Defendant's pending Rule 11 Motion (Doc. 90) is due within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order (see Order, 10/16/2015). Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke on 11/18/2015. (P,G)
November 23, 2015
PDF | More
Memorandum Opinion and Order adopting Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 110) to dismiss this case as time-barred. Defendants have achieved what they sought in their motion for summary judgment and in the Rule 11 Motion. (Doc. Nos. 83, 90.) Therefore, the Court denies the Rule 11 motion as moot. Judge Sara Lioi on 11/23/2015. (P,J)
July 29, 2016
PDF | More
2016. (P,J)Memorandum Opinion and Order: Defendants' motion for an award of attorney fees and costs (Doc. No. 114) is denied in part and granted in part. To the extent it seeks relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and 54 and under the civil rights statutes, the motion is denied. To the extent the motion seeks an award of attorney fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. Section 1927, it is granted. Within two (2) weeks of the date of this order, defendants shall submit a brief in support of the amount of the award for the Court's consideration. Plaintiff's counsel shall have two (2) weeks to respond. No reply will be permitted. The Court will thereafter take the matter of the amount of the award under advisement. Judge Sara Lioi on 7/29/
October 5, 2016
PDF | More
Memorandum Opinion and Order: Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (Doc. No. 121) is granted; but, upon reconsideration, the Court adheres to its original decision to award attorney fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. Section 1927. This matter is now referred to Magistrate Judge Burke for a final determination of the amount of fees and costs to award in favor of defendants against plaintiff's counsel. See 28 U.S.C. Section 636(b)(3). Magistrate Judge Burke is directed to apply her intimate knowledge of the procedural development of this case to determine an appropriate amount for the award. Within 14 days of the date of this order, defendants shall file a brief documenting the amount to which they believe they are entitled. Plaintiff's opposition shall be filed within 14 days after defendants' brief. No additional briefs will be permitted absent leave of Magistrate Judge Burke. Finally, counsel are encouraged to use their best efforts to mutually agree upon an appropriate award so as to avoid both the need for the magistrate judge to decide and the need for any appeal. This matter should be put to rest as amicably as possible and everyone should move on. Judge Sara Lioi on 10/5/2016. (P,J)
May 3, 2017
PDF | More
Memorandum Opinion and Order: Plaintiff's counsel Edward L. Gilbert shall pay $25,995.32 to defendant Hickory Healthcare Inc. on or before May 31, 2017. See order for details. Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke on 5/3/2017. (D,I)
October 16, 2017
PDF | More
Memorandum Opinion and Order: The Court concludes that plaintiff's counsel has failed to establish that the magistrate judge's memorandum opinion and order of May 3, 2017 is clearly erroneous or contrary to law in any particular respect. Accordingly, the order is affirmed and final judgment will be entered. (Related Doc. Nos. 141, 142, 143, 144). Judge Sara Lioi on 10/16/2017. (P,J)