Haley v. Clark Construction Group-California, Inc.
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:18-cv-07542
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Haley v. Clark Construction Group-California, Inc., Judge Gilliam ordered Haley to explain why the requested bench trial should not be allowed.
Lawrence Haley and Clark Construction Group-California, Inc.; the order required Haley to explain his failure to oppose the defendant’s motion.
What happened
In Haley v. Clark Construction Group-California, Inc., the defendant asked the court to change the scheduling order so the case would be tried by a judge instead of a jury. The plaintiff had not filed an opposition to the request, although he had continued participating in the case.
The court said an opposition generally must be filed within 14 days. It explained that, in its discretion, it could treat the failure to respond as agreement that the defendant’s motion should be granted. The court did not grant the motion at this stage.
Judge Gilliam ordered the plaintiff to explain by September 20, 2019, why the defendant’s motion should not be granted because he failed to oppose it. The order is a request for an explanation, not a final ruling on the type of trial.
The detailed version
- Haley v. Clark Construction Group-California, Inc. · No. 4:18-cv-07542
- Haywood Gilliam
- Sept. 16, 2019
Background
On May 21, 2019, Clark Construction Group-California, Inc. filed a motion asking the court to modify the scheduling order so that the case would be tried without a jury. Lawrence Haley had not filed an opposition, even though he had been actively participating in the case.
Court’s analysis
The court cited Northern District of California Local Rule 7-3(a), which generally requires an opposition to be filed and served no more than 14 days after the motion was filed. The court also explained that it may treat a party’s failure to oppose a motion as a concession that the motion should be granted.
Order
The court ordered Haley to show cause by September 20, 2019, why the defendant’s motion should not be granted in light of his failure to oppose it. The opinion does not grant or deny the motion to change the trial from a jury trial to a bench trial; it directs Haley to provide an explanation first.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.