Freeman v. Deebs-Elkenaney

Nature of the order

This is an amended scheduling order governing pretrial proceedings. The court did not resolve the parties’ claims or decide the anticipated motions for summary judgment or to exclude expert testimony.

Discovery

The defendants’ expert evidence intended to contradict or rebut expert evidence on the same subject, other than damages evidence, was due August 31, 2023. All expert discovery other than damages discovery was scheduled to be completed by September 29, 2023. Further expert discovery concerning damages was deferred until after the court ruled on the parties’ summary-judgment motions and the defendants responded to the plaintiff’s outstanding damages discovery.

Summary-judgment schedule

The order states that Lynne Freeman intended to move for summary judgment against Tracy Deebs-Elkenaney, Entangled Publishing, LLC, Universal City Studios, LLC, and Holtzbrinck Publishers, LLC, identified as the Publishing Defendants, as well as Emily Sylvan Kim and Prospect Agency, LLC, identified as the Prospect Defendants. It also states that both defendant groups intended to cross-move for summary judgment.

The plaintiff’s motion and supporting brief were due October 20, 2023, with a 30-page limit. The Publishing Defendants and Prospect Defendants were each to file opposition and affirmative-motion briefs by November 22, 2023, with a 50-page limit for each brief. The plaintiff’s reply and opposition briefs were due December 22, 2023, with a 40-page limit for each brief. Each defendant group’s reply brief was due January 12, 2024, with a 15-page limit for each brief.

Expert-witness motions

The parties intended to file motions under Evidence Rule 702 and the standard described in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The order directed the plaintiff to file her motion to exclude expert testimony by October 20, 2023, with a 20-page supporting brief. All defendants were to file a combined motion by November 22, 2023, with a 40-page brief supporting their motion and opposing the plaintiff’s motion. The plaintiff’s opposition was due December 22, 2023, with a 20-page limit. No reply briefs would be accepted for these motions.

Other pretrial matters

The court stayed compliance with Rule 4(a) of Judge Louis L. Stanton’s Individual Rules until further order. The court also stated that settlement conferences generally needed to be scheduled six to eight weeks in advance and encouraged the parties to contact the courtroom deputy with three mutually convenient dates.

Disposition and classification

The court entered the amended scheduling order. Because the order addresses scheduling and discovery rather than deciding the merits of the underlying dispute, it is classified as a procedural order.