Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled June 17, 2020

Abboud v. Xcel Energy Inc.

Judge
Patrick Schiltz
Docket
0:19-cv-02826
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Abboud v. Xcel Energy, Judge Leung granted Abboud’s second health-related continuance motion and stayed the case until October 14, 2020.

Who this affects

The order paused Camille A. Abboud’s case against Xcel Energy, Inc., et al., and affected the parties’ litigation schedule. It did not decide the underlying employment-discrimination or Minnesota common-law claims.

What happened

In Abboud v. Xcel Energy, Inc., Camille A. Abboud, who was representing himself, brought claims under federal employment-discrimination laws and Minnesota common law. The court had previously stayed the case so Abboud could receive treatment for significant health issues.

Abboud asked for another stay because his treatment would continue for at least several more weeks. The defendants took no position on the request, and the record did not show that a further stay would harm them.

The court granted Abboud’s second motion for a continuance for health reasons. Judge Tony N. Leung extended the stay for 90 days, until October 14, 2020, with the stay lifting automatically unless the court ordered otherwise.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Abboud v. Xcel Energy Inc. · No. 0:19-cv-02826
Judge
Patrick Schiltz
Date
June 17, 2020

Background

Camille A. Abboud filed claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and Minnesota common law. Abboud represented himself. The court had previously granted a request to stay, or pause, the case until July 16, 2020, so Abboud could focus on treatment for significant health issues.

Abboud then filed a second motion for a continuance for health reasons. He stated that his treatment would last at least several more weeks. He also stated that the defendants took no position on the motion.

Analysis

The court explained that federal courts have inherent authority to control the timing of proceedings on their dockets. A party seeking a stay bears the burden of showing that the stay is needed, and the court must balance the competing interests while considering possible prejudice to the opposing party.

For the same reasons supporting the earlier stay, the court found that Abboud had established good cause for another stay. The court also found nothing in the record showing that the stay would prejudice the defendants.

Disposition

The court granted Abboud’s Second Motion for Continuance for Health Reasons. It stayed the matter until October 14, 2020, and ordered that the stay would lift automatically unless the court entered a further order. The court also stated that all prior consistent orders remained in effect. Judge Tony N. Leung signed the order as the United States Magistrate Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.